TMI Blog1968 (8) TMI 189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne located in the village Basera and run under the name and style of M/s. Baburam Ashok Kumar and (2) the other located in village Morna and run under the name and style of M/s. Baburam Prakash Chandra, both in the district of Muzaffarnagar. The case of the appellant was that the business of manufacturing Khandsari was seasonal and was carried on at both the places for less than 5 months in a year, i.e., from the month of November to the beginning of April. Under the U.P. District Boards Act No. X of 1922, the District Board of Muzaffarnagar was empowered to levy tax under ss. 108 and. 114 in the rural area. Section 114 was to the following effect: The power of a board to impose a tax on circumstances and property shall be subject to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the date fixed and thereafter the Assessing Officer shall allow the assessee an opportunity to be heard. Rule 16 read with Rule 2 fixed the maximum limit of the total amount of tax assessed on any person not to exceed ₹ 2,000/- in any year, having regard to all the activities of an assessee within the district whether carried on under the same or a different name. In the year 1950 the Constitution of India was promulgated and under el. 2 of Art. 276 the total amount payable in respect of any one person to the district board, local Board or other local authority in the State by way of taxes on professions, trades, callings and employments shall not exceed two hundred and fifty rupees per annum. On August 22, 1958, the U.P. Antarim Z ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment order. The writ petition was summarily dismissed on July 21, 1960 by Jagdish Sahai, J. on a preliminary point that the appellant had a right to appeal to the prescribed authority under s. 128 of U.P. Act no. X of 1922. The appellant thereafter preferred a Special Appeal no. 452 of 1960 in the Allahabad High Court against the order of Jagdish Sahai, J. which was also dismissed on the ground that the appellant had an alternative remedy of appeal. During the pendency of the Special Appeal no. 452 of 1960, another new Act, namely the U.P. Kshetra Samitis and Zila Parishads Adhiniyam of 1961 (i.e., the U.P. Act no. XXXII of 1961).was passed by the U.P. Legislature and on November 29, 1961 received the assent of the President of India. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ous remedy is open to a litigant he should be required to pursue that remedy and not to invoke the special jurisdiction of the High Court to issue a prerogative writ. It is true that the existence of a statutory remedy does not affect the jurisdiction of the High Court to issue a writ. But, as observed by this Court in Rashid Ahmed v. The Municipal Board, Kairana([1950] S.C.R. 566), the existence of an adequate legal remedy is a thing to be taken into consideration in the matter of granting writs and where such a remedy exists it will be a sound exercise of discretion to refuse to interfere. in a writ petition unless there are good grounds therefore. But it should be remembered that the rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies before a wr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been issued in spite of the fact that the aggrieved party. had other adequate legal remedies. In the King v. Postmaster-. General Ex parte Carmichael [1928 (1) K.B. 291] a certiorari was issued although the aggrieved party had and alternative remedy by way of appeal. It has been held' that the superior court will readily issue a certiorari in a case where there has been a denial of natural justice before a court of summary jurisdiction. The case of Rex v. Wandsworth Justices Ex parte Read [1942 (1) K.B. 281] is an authority in point. In that case a man had been convicted in a court of summary jurisdiction without giving him an opportunity of being heard. It Was held that his remedy was not by a case stated or by an appeal before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersons or any property or class of properties from the scope of the Act. There is also an allegation that the imposition of the tax violated the provisions of Art. 276 of the Constitution and that the Antarim Zila Parishad could not impose the tax beyond the maximum limit of ₹ 250/per annum prescribed in that Article. It was further contended on behalf of the appellant that the procedure for assessment of the tax was not followed and there was violation of the principles of natural justice. In view of the allegations of the appellant that the taxing provisions are ultra vires and that there was violation of the principles of natural justice, we think that the High Court was in error in summarily dismissing the writ petition on the gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
