Government liability for bona fide quasi-judicial acts was denied where the tax officer acted within authority.

Government liability for loss caused by a subordinate tax officer depends on whether the officer acted within authority and in discharge of public duty. An administrative officer performing quasi-judicial functions is protected when he acts honestly, in good faith, and within the general range of his duties, even if his judgment is mistaken. That protection does not extend to acts beyond authority, malicious conduct, or negligent non-performance of duty. On the facts stated, the refusal to issue the transport permit was a bona fide exercise of judgment within authority, so the Government was not liable for the claimed loss.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Government was liable in damages for loss alleged to have been caused by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer's refusal to issue a transport permit, where the officer acted bona fide and within the scope of his authority.

Analysis: Liability of the Government for acts of subordinate public officers depends on whether the officer acted within the limits of authority and in discharge of public duty. Where an administrative officer exercising quasi-judicial functions acts honestly, in good faith, and within the general range of his duties, the law protects him from liability for an error in judgment or an innocently made mistake. Protection is not available where the act is beyond authority, malicious, or involves negligent non-performance of duty. On the facts found, the refusal to issue the permit was an honest exercise of judgment made bona fide within the officer's authority, and therefore the Government could not be fastened with liability for the claimed loss.

Conclusion: The Government was not liable for the loss claimed, as the officer's action was bona fide and within authority.

---