1968 (8) TMI 189 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court overturns judgments, restores writ petition, emphasizes addressing legal issues.

BABURAM PRAKASH CHANDRA MAHESHWARI Versus ANTARIM ZILA PARISHAD NOW ZILA PARISHAD MUZAFFARNAGAR

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside previous judgments and directing the restoration of the writ petition for further consideration. The ... - Issues:1. Validity of assessment orders for the circumstances and property tax.2. Jurisdiction of the High Court to issue a writ under Art. 226 of the Constitution.3. Allegations of ultra vires taxing provisions and violation of natural justice.Analysis:1. Validity of Assessment Orders:The appellant, a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing Khandsari sugar, challenged the assessment orders issued by the Antarim Zila Parishad for the circumstances and property tax for the years 1959-60 and 1961-62. The appellant contended that the Taxing Officer lacked authority to impose the tax and that the Parishad was not validly constituted after December 31, 1959. Additionally, the appellant alleged violations of constitutional provisions, including Art. 14 and Art. 276, and procedural irregularities. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in summarily dismissing the writ petition based on the availability of an alternative statutory appeal. The Court found merit in the appellant's contentions regarding ultra vires taxing provisions and violation of natural justice, leading to the allowance of the appeal and setting aside of the previous judgments.2. Jurisdiction of the High Court:The primary argument presented on behalf of the appellant was that the High Court was mistaken in deeming the statutory appeal under the U.P. District Boards Act as a sufficient remedy, thereby requiring the appellant to exhaust it before seeking relief under Art. 226 of the Constitution. The Court acknowledged the general principle that litigants should pursue available remedies before invoking the High Court's special jurisdiction. However, exceptions exist where statutory remedies are inadequate or where there are violations of natural justice. In this case, the Court found that the High Court's discretion was not exercised in accordance with the law, as the appellant's allegations of ultra vires provisions and procedural irregularities warranted consideration beyond the statutory appeal process.3. Allegations of Ultra Vires Provisions and Violation of Natural Justice:The appellant raised substantial legal arguments challenging the validity of the taxing provisions under the U.P. District Boards Act, alleging violations of constitutional rights and procedural improprieties. Specifically, the appellant contended that the tax imposition exceeded the prescribed limits under Art. 276 of the Constitution and that the assessment procedure did not adhere to principles of natural justice. The Court recognized the seriousness of these allegations and concluded that the High Court's summary dismissal of the writ petition was erroneous. The Court emphasized that the discretion of the High Court should align with legal principles, especially in cases involving potential ultra vires actions and violations of natural justice.In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the previous judgments, and directed the restoration of the writ petition for further consideration in accordance with the law. The Court highlighted the importance of addressing substantial legal issues raised by the appellant, including challenges to the validity of taxing provisions and procedural fairness, which warranted a more thorough examination beyond the statutory appeal process.