Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA versus TEHSILDAR, HASANPUR, DISTRICT JYOTIBA PHULE NAGAR & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sanjay Kumar Gupta v. Tehsildar, Hasanpur, District Jyotiba Phule Nagar & ors. - WRIT - C No. 801 of 2003 [2003] RD-AH 187 (4 July 2003)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO. 34

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 801 OF 2003

Sanjay Kumar Gupta         ---------    Petitioner

              Vs.

Tehsildar, Hasanpur,

District Jyotiba Phule Nagar & ors. ----------- Respondents

Hon'ble Dr. B.S.Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble D.P.Gupta, J.

(By Hon'ble Dr. B.S.Chauhan, J.)

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the Citation (Recovery Certificate) dated 29.8.2002, issued by the respondent no. 1, for depositing a sum of Rs.47,234/-.

Recovery Certificate is being sought to be quashed only on the ground that it had been issued without giving any opportunity of hearing. Matter relates to the tax in respect of the vehicle owned and possessed by the petitioner. Whatever may be the factual position, the fact remains that Recovery Certificate should have been issued as a consequence of the assessment order passed by the District Taxation Officer under the provisions of U.P.Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1997. The said assessment order is appealable. It is settled legal proposition that a consequential order cannot be challenged without challenging the basic order.

In the instant case, the basic order of assessment, in pursuance of which the impugned Recovery Certificate has been issued is neither on record nor petitioner tried to obtain the copy thereof. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that writ cannot be entertained for quashing the Recovery Certificate in absence of challenge of the assessment order. (Vide C.P.Chitranjan Menon & ors. Vs. A Balakrishnan & ors., AIR 1977 SC 1720; Roshan Lal & ors. Vs. International Airport Authority of India & ors., AIR 1981 SC 597; and H.M. Pardasani Vs. Union of India & ors., AIR 1985 SC 781).

Thus in view of the above, petition is dismissed.

4.7.2003

AKSI


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.