GOPAL NARAIN versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.
Sections 7, 8, and 128 of the Act together with procedures in Sections 131–136 provide sufficient policy and guidance for classification and taxation in part of a municipality; the taxation imposed is not arbitrary, is based on geographic and amenities distinction, and does not violate Article 14 or 19(1)(f); statutory procedure was not shown to be violated.
- Parties
- Petitioner: Gopal Narain; Respondent: State of Uttar Pradesh; Respondent: Municipal Board, Bareilly
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 03 September 1963
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Equality Before Law, Classification and Taxation, Arbitrary Powers of Local Bodies
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gopal Narain
Petitioner
State of Uttar Pradesh
Respondent
Municipal Board, Bareilly
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Section 128(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 authorizing taxation in part of a municipality violates Article 14
- 2 Whether the notification imposing taxes in Civil Lines area is discriminatory
- 3 Whether Section 131(1)(b) confers arbitrary power violating Article 14
Ratio Decidendi
Sections 7, 8, and 128 of the Act together with procedures in Sections 131–136 provide sufficient policy and guidance for classification and taxation in part of a municipality; the taxation imposed is not arbitrary, is based on geographic and amenities distinction, and does not violate Article 14 or 19(1)(f); statutory procedure was not shown to be violated.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- Petition dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment