Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 -- House tax -- Speaking order -- Assessing and appellate authorities can assess/amend the assessment by increasing or reducing after recording adequate reasons, as envisaged under section 103 (1)(d) & (e) of the Act -- No such adequate reasons have been mentioned by the appellate authority -- Order is held to be cryptic, non-speaking and non-reasoned. Jagmohan Chopra v. Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 631 (P&H).
Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 -- Speaking order -- Appellate authority ought to have discussed the material on record and was legally required to record valid reasons for arriving at a right conclusion, in order to decide the real controversy between the parties in the right perspective -- Such statutory authority, exercising the powers under the Act, should act independently instead of functioning as a representative of the State/M.C -- Every action of such authority must be informed by reasons -- Order must be fair, clear, reasonable and in the interest of fair play -- Every order must be confined and structured by rational and relevant material on record because the valuable rights of the parties are involved. Jagmohan Chopra v. Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala and others, 2011(1) L.A.R. 631 (P&H).
No comments:
Post a Comment