1. HAMOODUR RAHMAN, J.-These two petitions have been filed by the Chairman, District Council, Jhelum, for leave to appeal from an order of a Division Bench of the High Court of West Pakistan in two petitions under Article 98 of the Constitution, which were heard and disposed of analogously.
2. The writ petitions were filed by the employees of the Pakistan Tobacco Company Limited, Okara, and the railway employees in the Jhelum district respectively, to challenge the validity of the deduction from their salaries of the tax on "professions, trades and callings" levied by the District Councils concerned under the Basic Democracies Order, 1959, and of the notification by virtue of which the tax was sought to be levied.
3. The notification, it appears, was issued in pursuance of the provisions of subsection (6) of section 31 of the Punjab District Boards Act, 1883, on the 17th of June 1947. It was the contention of the petitioners in the writ petitions that the said notification was no longer operative, as the District Boards Act itself had been repealed by the Basic Democracies Order, 1959, and Article 4 of the latter Order did not and could not keep the notification alive in so far as it had become inconsistent with the provisions of the Order of 1959.
4. The High Court upheld this contention and declared the imposition of the tax as having been made without legal authority.
5. Section 30 of the District Boards Act empowered a District Board to "impose any tax which the Legislature has power to impose in the Province" under the Government of India Act, 1935", with the previous sanction of the Provincial Government. Now under List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Government of India Act, 1935, the Provincial Government had power to levy taxes on "professions, trades, callings and employments" (vide item 46, List II). The Basic Democracies Order, 1959, however, provided by Article 60 thereof that a District Council may, with the previous sanction of the Government levy, in the prescribed manner, all or any of the taxes, rates, tolls and fees mentioned in the Fifth Schedule, and item 7 of the Fifth Schedule specified a tax "on professions, trades and callings". The word "employ--ment" occurring in item 45 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Government of India Act, 1935, was omitted. The High Court accordingly held that the omission of this word from the Fifth Schedule of the Basic Democracies Order, 1959, was signifi- -cant. It indicated a clear intention on the part of the Legislature to exclude a tax on employment simpliciter.
6. It is now sought to be contended on behalf of the petitioners before us that notwithstanding this omission there was no incon--sistency, for, the word "profession" was by itself under its ordinary dictionary meaning were enough to include "employ--ment". In support of this contention learned counsel has also placed reliance on a decision of the East Punjab High Court in the case of Waliat Ram Nathu Ram v. Municipal Committee, Rupar (AIR 1960 Pb. 669) where, it appears, the validity of a notification imposing a tax on every person carrying on a trade, profession, calling or employment purported to have been issued under section 61 (1) (b) of the Punjab Municipal Act was held to be valid, even though the said section only authorised the municipality to levy "-a tax on persons practicing any profession or art or carrying on any trade or calling in the municipality".
7. This decision does not, however, advance the petitioner's contention, for, the said section 61 (1) (b) of the Punjab Municipal Act itself had an explanation appended to it which provided that "a person in the service of the Government or person holding an office under the State Government or a Central Government or a local or other public authority shall be deemed to be practicing a profession within the meaning of this sub-clause". If this explanation had not been there the word "profession" might not have been given the were meaning which was given to it in that case.
8. We have no doubt in our mind that the conscious deletion of, the word "employment" from item 7 of the Fifth Schedule of the Basic Democracies Order, 1959, clearly manifested an intention on the part of the law-giver to exclude the tax on employment) simpliciter from the category of taxes which could be levied by a municipal authority functioning under the said Order.
9. As has been held by this Court in the case of Pakistan Tobacco Company Limited v. The Karachi Municipal Corporation (PLD.1967SC241) "a Legislature is deemed to be aware of the previous state of the law and if knowing this it makes a change when repealing it and re--enacting some of its provisions the intention is clearly to effect a change".
10. For these reasons we are of the view that there is no substance in the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner. Both these petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.