Case: Janapada Sabha, Chhindwara Etc Vs. The Central Provinces Syndicate Ltd. And Anr.Etc

2. The Independent Mining Local Board, Chhindwara, a Board constituted under the Central Provinces Local Self-Government Act 4 of 1920, resolved on March 12, 1935 to levy a cess under Sec. 51 of the Act at the rate of 3 pies per ton on coal extracted within the area. Sanction of the local Government was obtained to that levy. On December 22, 1943, the rate was enhanced to 4 Pies per ton: it was enhanced on July 29, 1946 to 7 pies per ton and on July 19, 1947 the cess was enhanced to 9 pies per ton. The Central Provinces Local Self-Government Act 4 of 1920 was repealed with effect from June 11, 1948 by the C. P. and Berar Local Government Act 38 of 1948. By Sec. 192 of Act 38 of 1948 it was enacted, inter alia, that all rules, bye-laws and orders made, notifications and notices issued, taxes imposed or assessed, cesses, fees tolls or rates levied under Act 4 of 1920 and in force immediately before the commencement of Act 38 of 1948 shall continue to be in force and shall be deemed to have been respectively made, issued, granted, imposed or assessed, levied and taken under Act 38 of 1948, and all rates, taxes and cesses due to the Independent Local Board shall be deemed to be due to the Sabha to whose areas they pertain.3. The levy of coal cess by the Sabha was challenged by the Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. and others on diverse grounds in petitions filed in this Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution. This Court rejected the petitions holding that Act 4 of 1920 had received the assent of the Governor-General and its validity was not liable to be challenged and that "on a proper interpretation of Section 51 of the Act the levy of coal cess was not excluded from the purview of the local authority". It was also held that the levy of the cess was valid even after the coming into force ofthe Government of India Act, 1935, and the Constitution of India, in view of Sec. 143 of

Court's reasoning:
The nature of the amendment made in Act 4 of 1920 has not been indicated. Nor is there anything which enacts that the notifications issued without the sanction of the State Government must be deemed to have been issued validly under Sec. 51 (2) without the sanction of the Local Government. On the words used in the Act, it is plain that the Legislature attempted to overrule or set aside the decision of this Court. That, in our Judgment, is not open to the Legislature to do under our constitutional scheme. It is open to the Legislature within certain limits to amend the provisions of an Act retrospectively and to declare what the law shall be deemed to have been, but it is not open to the Legislature to say that a judgment of a Court properly constituted and rendered in exercise of its powers in a matter brought before it shall be deemed to be ineffective and the interpretation of the law shall be otherwise than as declared by the Court.This Court in Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd.s case, 1963 Supp (1) SCR 172 = (AIR 1964 SC 1013  ), held that the cess was not validly imposed and levied because the sanction of the State Government was not obtained at the time of enhancing the rate of levy of tax. That judgment was binding between the parties and also by virtue of Article 141 binding on all Courts in the territory of India. The Legislature could not say that declaration of law was either erroneous, invalid or ineffective either as a precedent or between the parties.It is unnecessary then to consider whether the repealed Act may be amended without re-enactment.