1. The Town Panchayat Committee of Kittur, in the district of Belgaum passed a resolution on November 6, 1960, deciding to levy octroi on petroleum and diesel products brought into the limits of the panchayat. Objections were invited to the proposed levy and, on November 19, 1960, some of the inhabitants of the panchayat area produced their objections against the proposed levy. It is stated that the panchayat thereupon decided to levy octroi from November 1, 1961, as originally proposed by it.

2. Respondent 1 in this writ petition, who owns a petroleum pump in Kittur as the agent of the Burmah Shell, made a representation to the concerned Assistant Commissioner against the levy of octroi on petroleum and diesel products brought for his pump into the area of the panchayat. The Assistant Commissioner did not uphold that contention and so, the petitioner appealed to the Divisional Commissioner who declared the levy to be illegal, since, in his opinion, the necessary bye - laws had not been made or published by the panchayat.

3. The Town Panchayat Committee, which feels aggrieved by this order made by the Divisional Commissioner, asks us to quash it.

4. Mr. Moogi contends that the requirement that there should be bye - law for the levy of the octroi came into being only on December 7, 1961, when the Mysore Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act, 1959, was amended by the Mysore Village Panchayats and Local Boards (Amendment) Act, 1961 (Mysore Act No. 26 of 1961). He points out that S.73 of the principal Act which was amended by the amending Act made it necessary, for the first time, for the panchayat to make a bye - law for the levy of octroi and that it was not necessary for the panchayat to make any such bye - law before the section was so amended. So Mr. Moogi contends that the impression in the mind of the Divisional Commissioner that no octroi could have been levied on November 1, 1961, when S.73 had not yet been amended, overlooked the provisions of that section as they stood prior to its amendment.

5. It is true that the Divisional Commissioner's view that a bye - law should have preceded the levy in the case before us, is mistaken. S.73 of the Act, as it stood when the impugned levy was made by the panchayat, read :
(3) A Town Panchayat may in such manner and subject to such exemptions and at such rates as may be prescribed, not exceeding the maximum rate specified in Schedule 1. levy octroi:
Provided that no octroi shall be leviable in respect of agricultural produce grown in any area within the jurisdiction of the Town Panchayat.
This sub-section confers power on the panchayat to levy octroi in such manner as may be prescribed. The word 'prescribed' occurring in this sub-section, as defined by S.2(28) means "prescribed by rules made under this Act"

6. The relevant rules were made by Government under S.210 of the Act on May 17, 1960, which are called the Mysore Panchayat Taxes and Fees Rules, 1960. R.4 and R.5 prescribe the procedure for the levy of octroi and those rules do not insist upon a bye - law preceding such levy.

7. It is, however, obvious that the Divisional Commissioner's view that such bye - law was necessary rested upon the amendment made to S.73 of the principal Act on December 7, 1961. By that amendment, for the old sub-section (3), a new sub section was substituted which reads:
"A Town Panchayat may levy octroi at such rates as the Panchayat may by bye - laws determine not exceeding the maximum rate specified in Schedule I and in such manner and subject to such exemptions as may be prescribed xx xx ''
The amending Act saved by its provisions octroi levied or imposed under the principal Act before the commencement of the amending Act.

8. In the case before us, the levy was made by the panchayat on November 1, 1961; and so, if the levy is otherwise above reproach, that levy having been made under the principal Act before it was amended, was saved by S.8 of the amending Act. If this was all that could be said abo