MAHARAJA SHRI UMAID MILLS LTD Vs. MUNICIPAL BOARD PALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application by the Maharaja Shri Umaid Mills Ltd. Pali under Art. 226 of the Constitution against the Municipal Board, Pali (hereinafter referred to as the Board) and the State of Rajasthan in connection with the Octroi tax levied by the Board.

(2.) THE applicant's case is briefly this. THE applicant is a company manufacturing cloth. In this connection, it has to import cotton from various parts of India into Pali. After the cotton is woven, it is exported to different parts of India and major part of the manufactures of the Mill goes out of the limits of Pali municipality. THEre was previous litigation between the applicant and the Board which has been narrated in the application, but to which we need not refer. It is enough to say that the Board has started levying octroi tax with effect from the 5th of September, 1956 under the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, 1951 (Act No. XXIII of 1951) (hereinafter called the Act ). It has framed octroi-rules and by-laws under the Act with the sanction of the Government of Rajasthan. In that connection, the Board asked the applicant to pay octroi duty on all goods imported by it within the municipal limits, applicant contends that it was illegal on the part of the Board to levy octroi duty on all goods imported by it within the municipal limits and relying in this connection on sections 46 (l) (k), 59 and 81 of the Act, it is contended that it was the duty of the Board to provide for refund by passing suitable bye-laws under sec, 46 (1) (k) and as this had not been done, the Board was not authorised to levy any tax on goods imported by the applicant, particularly cotton. THE main grievance of the applicant is that as most of the goods manufactured out of cotton imported by the applicant are exported out of the municipal limits, the Board should have provided for refund of octroi on that part of the imported cotton which was used for the manufacture of goods exported out of the municipal limits. It is also said that the bye-laws and the rules have not been printed as required by sec. 47 of the Act.

(3.) AS to sec. 47, which provides for printing of rules and bye-laws, it is enough to say that it is merely a directory provision and even if there is some irregularity or delay in complying with it, it will not invalidate the bye-laws or rules framed by the board.