P. L. BHARGAVA, J.

( 1 ) THE following question has been referred to the Full Bench for opinion : "whether Section 293, U. P. Municipalities Act, authorises a Municipal Board to change a fee in respect of projections which existed prior to the enactment of the bye-law imposing such a fee. "

( 2 ) THE facts and circumstances leading to the reference are these: The city of Kanauj has been declared to be a municipality under Section 3, U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916. In the year 1938 the Municipal Board of Kanauj made a bye law under Section 298 (E) (b), Municipalities Act described as the "projection Bye-laws" levying an annual fee on the projections within the limits of the municipality. The bye-law was duly sanctioned by the sanctioning authority and it was notified in the United Provinces Gazette. Subsequently by means of another notification in the gazette the bye-laws were made applicable to the "existing projections within municipal limits," manohar Lal, the plaintiff-respondent, resides and owns a house within the municipal limits of kanauj. In the year 1934 he rebuilt or made alterations in his house and built a projection on a public street, which is less than 25 feet in widt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document