Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Einth Nirmata Samiti Barabanki Thru ... vs Zila Panchayat Barabanki Thru ... on 10 April, 2017

Bench: Sudhir Agarwal, Kaushal Jayendra Thaker





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 3
 

 
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 5631 of 2004
 

 
Petitioner :- Einth Nirmata Samiti Barabanki Thru Secy.H.R. Gupta & Anr.
 
Respondent :- Zila Panchayat Barabanki Thru Adhyaksha/U.M.A. & Anr.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar,U.K. Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Kumar,Sri A K Chaturvedi,Virendra Kumar Shukla
 

 
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
 

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

1. Called in revised. None appeared to press this writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel is present for respondents. In the circumstances, we have perused the record.

2. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:

"A. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing Rule 7(C) of the U.P. ( Zila Panchayats) Imposition, Assessment and Collection of Circumstances and Property Tax) Rules, 1994  being ultravires and Unconstitutional of the Article 276(2) of the Constitution of India.
B. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the recovery certificates, if any, issued although not served on the members of the petitioner Samiti, after summoning their originals from the opposite parties.
C. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 1 not to demand CP Tax more than 2500/- per annum as provided under Article 276(2) of the Constitution of India from the members of the petitioner Samiti.
D. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite party no. 1 to refund excess amount of C.P. Tax which has been paid by the members of the petitioner no. 1 Samiti, after 1994."

3. Having gone through the entire writ petition, we do not find any ground entitling petitioner for grant of any of above reliefs. No interference, therefore, is called for.

4. Dismissed.

5. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

Order Date :- 10.4.2017/Mukesh