TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , has, in clear words, written that the actual name of the village is “Village Nandpur Narka Topa” and there is no village in the name of “Village Nandpur Narka Ropa” in Tehsil Bazpur. The mistake was certainly committed by some official working in the revenue department of district Udham Singh Nagar. The petitioner cannot be held responsible for that mistake. Considering all the those facts mentioned herein above and also considering the statement given by the learned Assistant Solicitor General for Union of India on 04.06.2015 that appropriate decision correcting name of the village can be taken. - Writ Petition No. 1230 of 2015 (M/S) - - - Dated:- 19-12-2016 - V. K. Bist, J. For the Petitioner : Arvind Vashisht (Senior Advocate), Imran Ali Khan, Vivek Pathak For the Respondent : Rakesh Thapliyal (Assistant Solicitor General for Union of India) P. C. Bisht, Tarun Lakhera, H. M. Bhatia JUDGMENT V. K. Bist, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: (i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to treat the name of Village Nandpur Ka Ropa as occurring in Notification No. 177 of 2004 dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ized for industrialization and forwarded by the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar to the State Government. Thereafter, petitioner submitted the representation and Halka Patwari, namely, Mr. Lawkesh Kumar Sharma submitted a report, certifying, in writing, that there is no village in Tehsil Bazpur in the name and style of Nandpur Ka Ropa and, due to typing mistake, village Nandpur Narka Topa has erroneously been mentioned as Nandpur Ka Ropa in the CBDT notification. The said report was countersigned by the Tehsildar, Bajpur. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for the benefit of income tax exemption under notification; but, the same was denied to it, due to incorrect name of the village. It is the contention of the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner that there is no fault of the petitioner and wrong name of the petitioner s village has been mentioned in the said notification. He submitted that the State Government should have, in fact, sent the proposal for correction of the name of the petitioner s village and the said notification should have been corrected accordingly. 3. When the matter was listed on 04.06.2015, this Court passed the following order: Mr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bazpur no village in the name of Village Nandpur Narka Ropa in fact the correct name of village is Village Nandpur Narka Topa, which falls under Tehsil Bazpur. 12. That in reply to the contents of para 16 of the writ petition it is submitted that the unit of the petitioner is situated at Revenue Village Nandpur Narka Topa at Tehsil Bazpur. It is submitted that there is no village in the name of Village Nandpur Narka Ropa in Tehsil Bazpur. 5. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General for Union of India would submit that, in the order dated 04.06.2015, the Court has directed the State Government to file an affidavit alongwith the recommendation made by the State Government; but, in fact, no such recommendation was sent by the State Government, therefore, there is no question of amendment in the notification. He submitted that there is no averment in this regard that any proposal was sent to the Central Government. He relied on paragraph no. 4 of judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (M/B) No.628 of 2005, wherein the Court has held that the Court cannot issue mandamus asking the Central Government to amend its notification and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectify the said mistake and, if the writ Court rectifies the same, what would be the effect thereof? If a mandamus is issued to incorporate those two Khasra numbers in the notification dated 10th June 2003, the same would tantamount to expansion of the policy, which the writ Court cannot do. The effect of such direction would be doing something which the Court is not competent to do. In the circumstances, we are constrained to hold that, although it appears to us that Khasra Nos. 60 (d) and 61 were not incorporated in Annexure II to the notification dated 10th June 2003 for the blunder on the part of the State in furnishing appropriate information to the Union of India, but we are incompetent to incorporate the same in the said notification, particularly, in view of the fact that when the said mistake was pointed out, the Central Government agreed to give advantage to new industrial units situated on the said Khasra numbers by incorporating Annexure III to the notification dated 10th June 2003 by the amendment effected on 19th May 2005 and, accordingly, the same should be deemed to be a conscious decision of the Central Government and, in as much as the same pertains to a polic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wrong action of the government official, should be permitted to continue on the technical ground? My answer to this query is no. The law is made to give justice to all. In my view, this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can pass appropriate order for giving justice to the aggrieved party. The Principal Secretary Micro, Small Medium Enterprises, Government of Uttarakhand, in her counter affidavit, has, in clear words, written that the actual name of the village is Village Nandpur Narka Topa and there is no village in the name of Village Nandpur Narka Ropa in Tehsil Bazpur. The mistake was certainly committed by some official working in the revenue department of district Udham Singh Nagar. The petitioner cannot be held responsible for that mistake. Considering all the those facts mentioned herein above and also considering the statement given by the learned Assistant Solicitor General for Union of India on 04.06.2015 that appropriate decision correcting name of the village can be taken, the writ petition is disposed in the following manner: (i) Petitioner is directed to serve a certified copy of this judgment on the Principal Secretary, Micro, Small ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
