Law:

Section:

Cantonments Act (II of 1924)-------Ss. 60 to 63, 220, 232 & 255---Enhancement of water charges by Cantonment Board---Non-observance of mandatory provisions of Cantonments Act, 1924---Effect---Terms "water charges" and "water tax"---Plaintiff filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction against defendants to the effect that enhancement of water tax by defendants was illegal and without lawful authority---Defendant's contention was that Board could itself levy water charges and was not obliged to follow procedure laid down in Ss.60 to 63 of the Cantonments Act, 1924 and refer matter to Central Government for approval---Suit was dismissed by Trial Court---Appellate Court set aside the of Trial Court---Validity---Under Ss.60, 61 and 255 of Cantonments Act, 1924, Board might, with previous sanction of Central Government, impose in any Cantonment any tax which, under any enactment for the time being in force, might be imposed in any Municipality wherein such Cantonment was situated---After passing of resolution for imposition of tax, Board was to publish a notice specifying the proposals to persons or classes of persons who were to be made liable for tax along with description of property and other taxable things---Proposals were to be published for objections and after hearing objections, final proposals were to be placed before Central Government---Section 232 of Cantonments Act, 1924 only empowered the Board to fix and levy charges for establishment of communication with main pipes for supply of water or gas and also to fix and levy charges for meters and other appliances for testing quality and quantity of water or gas supplied---Terms "water charges" and "water tax" were interchangeable---Procedure prescribed in Ss.60 to 63 was mandatory to revise and enhance' "water charges" or "water tax"---No illegality or irregularity was found in the of Appellate Court---Constitutional petition was dismissed. PLD 1978 Lah. 872 rel. Ghufran Khurshid Imtiazi for Petitioner. Sardar Muhammad Younis Khan for Respondent. ORDER SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.---The respondent had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the petitioners praying for a…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492