SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1958 Supreme(All) 168

B.R.JAMES
RAGHAVENDRA KRIPAL – Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL BOARD, HAPUR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.C.KHARE, S.N.Dwivedi

B. R. JAMES, J.

( 1 ) THE Municipal Board of Hapur decided to impose water-tax, and after its proposals and rules had been finalised they were sanctioned by the Commissioner (who is the prescribed authority for the purpose) and a Notification was published in the U. P. Gazette dated 11-12-1956 imposing the tax in question from 1-4-1957. The petitioners, who are fifteen house owners of hapur, received notices from the Board for payment of the water-tax assessed in respect of their houses. They have come up to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution and pray for the issue of a writ or order preventing the Board from realising the tax, and their principal contention is that the tax is illegal inasmuch as it has been imposed in contravention of various provisions of the municipalities Act 1916 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

( 2 ) WHEN a Board desires to impose a tax it is lequired to follow a procedure which is found laid down in Sections 131 to 135 of the Act. It is a somewhat complicated procedure, but it has been lucidly outlined in the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Kedar Nath v. Municipal board, Gorakhpur, 1956 ALJ 198. Hence it is not necessary for


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top