Prem Chand Jain vs State and Others

Hon''ble Rafiq, J.—Learned Counsels for the petitioners at the outset cited the judgment passed by this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in M/s. Golcha Minerals Pvt. Ltd. vs. State & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10921/2009 and other identical matters wherein vide judgment dated 28.1.2010, the similar demand notices for levy of land tax have been quashed. It is therefore prayed that the writ petitions be allowed in view of the aforesaid judgment.

Learned counsels for the petitioners have argued that in all these cases, assessment orders have been framed mechanically and without application of mind to the facts of given case. In certain cases, the mining area leased out was larger, but substantial part of that was still being retained by the khatedars and used for agriculture purposes and accordingly mining operations were being carried out in very smaller part of the land. It is argued that Section 38(c) of the Rajasthan Finance Act, 2006 (for short- the Act'')has defined the land and as per that definition, the land which is being cultivated for agriculture purposes is liable to be excluded for the purpose of land tax. Section 38(c), which defines ''land'' specifically excludes the land held or used exclusively for agricultural or residential purposes. There could be therefore no question of levying land tax on such land. In spite of the fact that petitioners submitted objections against the provisional assessment list, the assessing authority without considering such objections and without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as required by section 42(2) of the Act, unilaterally finalised the assessment order and issued attachment