D.M.CHANDRASHEKHAR, J. - (1.) IN this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the levy of Theatre Tax imposed by the Municipal Board, Pilibhit (hereinafter referred to as the Municipal Board).
(2.) THE material facts necessary for the decision of this petition, are briefly these : The petitioner is a partner in a cinema theatre in Pilibhit town which has a population of about 70,000. At its meeting held on 11 -4 -1972, the Municipal Board passed a resolution proposing to levy Theatre Tax at the rate of Rs. 25 per show. The Municipal Board published the above proposal in the manner prescribed by S. 94 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 16 -5 -1972, in a local Hindi Weekly Deshvhakt. No objections to this proposal were received from any one within 15 days from the date of such publication. Thereafter the Municipal Board submitted the proposal under sub -S. (4) of S. 132 to the Prescribed Authority, namely, the Commissioner, Rohilkhand Division. On 24 -8 -1972, the Prescribed Authority returned the proposal to the Municipal Board for further consideration as it (the Prescribed Authority) felt that the proposed rate of tax was too high. On 28 -8 -1972, the Municipal Board re -consiered the proposal and modified it by reducing the rate of tax to Rs. 15 per show; but the modified proposal was not published by the Municipal Board in any newspaper. On 16 -9 -1972, the petitioner and two other cinema operators of Pilibhit sent to the Municipal Board their objections to the proposal to levy Theatre Tax. Copies of such objections were sent to the Prescribed Authority and the District Magistrate. On 18 -9 -1972, the Municipal Board sent its modified proposal (to levy Theatre tax at the rate of Rs. 15 per show) to the Prescribed Authority, but the said objection did not accompany the modified proposal. On 31 -10 -1972, the Prescribed Authority sanctioned the modified proposal. On 18 -11 -1972, the draft rules for levy of Theatre Tax were published and objections thereto were invited within 30 days from the date of such publication. On 15 -12 -1972, the petitioner filed objections to the draft rules. Thereafter the Prescribed Authority considered the draft rules and accorded sanction thereto. The Municipal Board passed a special resolution under S. 134 for imposition of Theatre Tax with effect from 16 -4 -1973; and a notification under S. 135 of the Act was published in the U.P. Gazette dated 14 -4 -1973 for imposition of Theatre Tax with effect from 16 -4 -1973.
(3.) IN this petition, the petitioner has alleged, inter alia, as follows. On 23 -4 -1973, he applied for the copies of the proceedings of the Municipal Board relating to the levy of the impugned tax. On 30 -4 -1973 the office of the Municipal Board informed him that no copies would be issued. On 3 -5 -1973, the petitioner, his Advocate and two other cinema exhibitors went in a delegation to meet the Commissioner to voice their grievance in respect of the imposition of Theatre Tax and submitted a review petition. During the talk the Commissioner informed the delegation that no objections were brought to his knowledge before he approved the modified proposal of the Municipal Board.;