D CAWASJI AND COMPANY D CAWASJI AND COMPANY Vs. STATE OF MYSORE
LAWS(SC)-1974-10-37
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KARNATAKA)
Decided on October 29,1974

D.CAWASJI AND COMPANY Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MYSORE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Mathew, J. - (1.) The appellants filed writ petitions before the High Court of Mysore under Art. 226 of the Constitution for a declaration that the Mysore Elementary Education Act, 1941, and the amendments to it by the Mysore Elementary Education (Amendment) Act (XII of 1955) providing for levy and collection of Education Cess on items on which Education Cess is being levied as prescribed in the schedules of the respective Acts were beyond the competence of the Mysore State Legislature and for refund of the Educational Cess paid during 1951-52 to 1965-66 on shop rentals and tree tax in respect of toddy and duty of excise in respect of arrack and special liquor. The High Court dismissed the Writ Petitions by a common judgment and these appeals are directed against that judgment.
(2.) The High Court of Mysore had, in D. Cawasji and Co. v. State of Mysore, (1968) 2 Mys LJ 78, struck down the provisions of the Mysore Elementary Education Act and the amendments to it on May 2, 1968. That decision was affirmed by this Court in State of Mysore v. D. Cawasji and Co., (1971) 2 SCR 799 . Before the decision of this Court, the Mysore Legislature had passed the Mysore Education Cess (Validation and Levy) Act, 1969 on September 10, 1969 validating the levy and the collection of cess under the Act. But the Validation Act was held to be invalid by the Mysore High Court. The writ petitions were filed before the High Court in June and July, 1968, i. e. after the decision of the Mysore High Court in (1968) a Mys LJ78 and before this Court rendered its judgment
(3.) The contention of the appellants before the High Court was that the payments of cess in question were made by them under a mistake of law; that they discovered the mistake only on May 2,1968 when the High Court, by its Judgment, declared that the provisions of the Act and the amendments thereto were unconstitutional, and that, as they filed the writ petitions within three months of that decision, the writ petitions were within time.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.