Writ maintainability and octroi exemption for Union goods were upheld, with refund directed where levy lacked authority.

A writ petition remained maintainable despite an alternative statutory remedy where the levy was alleged to be without authority and the dispute did not arise from assessment under the municipal statute. On octroi, articles belonging to the Union of India were exempt under the relevant schedule, read with Article 285 of the Constitution; ownership had passed to the Union before the goods entered municipal limits, so the levy lacked legal foundation. The impugned orders were quashed, and refund was allowed with consequential interest if payment was not made within the stipulated time.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition was not maintainable for failure to exhaust the remedy under Section 138 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994; (ii) Whether the petitioner was entitled to exemption from octroi and refund of the tax paid on goods belonging to the Union of India.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petition was not maintainable for failure to exhaust the remedy under Section 138 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994.

Analysis: The statutory remedy did not oust writ jurisdiction where the levy was alleged to be without authority and the grievance did not concern assessment under the Act. The provision relied upon by the respondent did not bar entertainment of the petition in such circumstances.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable, and the objection based on alternative remedy was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner was entitled to exemption from octroi and refund of the tax paid on goods belonging to the Union of India.

Analysis: Clause 16 of the Octroi Schedule exempted articles belonging to the Union of India, except those liable to octroi prior to 1-4-1937. The Court also applied Article 285 of the Constitution of India and held that ownership had passed to the Union when payment was made to the seller, before the goods entered the municipal limits. On that basis, the levy was held to be without legal foundation.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to exemption from octroi and refund of the amount paid.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were quashed, and the refund claim succeeded with consequential interest if payment was not made within the stipulated time.

Ratio Decidendi: Goods owned by the Union of India are exempt from octroi under the applicable schedule and Article 285 of the Constitution of India, and a writ lies where the levy is claimed to be wholly without authority notwithstanding an alternative statutory remedy.

---