JUDGMENT H.N. Seth Seth, J. - By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners who carry on their trade find business within the limits of Alunicipal Board, Firozabad, hereinafter referred to as the Municipal Board, seek to prevent the Municipal Beard from realising with effect from 8th October, 1979. octroi in accordance with the rates published in the newspaper Yug Pariwar-tan" dated 27-9-1978. 2. According to the petitioners; Municipal Board stood Superseded as a .result of promulgation of U. P Ordinance entitled "U.P Mahpaiika, Notified Area and Town Area (Alpkalik Vyawastba) Adhyadesh, 1977 and all powers, functions and duties of the Municipal Board as also that of its President and various Committees vested in the District Magistrate. The Ordinance; was subsequently replaced by U.P. Act 13 of 1977 published in the Gazettee dated 1-10-1977. The Municipal Board had imposed octroi on entry of certain goods within its limit at the rated specified by it in the octroi schedule. On 27. 9.1978 a weekly newspaper" Yug Pdriwarlati" published a notice issued by the Executive Officer of the Municipal Board informing the general public that it was going to make the changes indicated therein in the existing octroi schedule. The notice specified the articles and the rates at which octroi was proposed to be charged in respect of entry of those articles it future also required the persons, who had any objection, to tile their objections within period of 15 days. Although the petitioners objected to the proposed changes in the octroi schedule, yet the Municipal Board without properly deciding their objections started collecting with effect from 8.10 1979 octroi at the enhanced rates that had been notified in" Youg Pariwartan" dated 27.9.1978. The petitioners contend that according to the U. P. Municipalities Act (hereinafter referred to the Act) right to impose octroi or to effect any change in the rates thereof vests in the Municipal Board. Action of the Executive Officer of the Board in changing the octroi schedule without following the procedure laid down in Sections 128 to 137 of the Act was completely without jurisdiction. Moreover, neither the Municipal Board nor the Executive Officer were, id the garb of changing the octroi schedule, competent to impose octroi on entry of such articles like coal on which no octroi had till then been imposed. Moreover, neither the Municipal Board nor the Executive Officer were, id the garb of changing the octroi schedule, competent to impose octroi on entry of such articles like coal on which no octroi had till then been imposed. The petitioners further contend that under the schedule of octroi notified in "Yug Pariwartan" dated 27.9.1978, octroi duty has inter alia, been imposed on articles like salt, drugs and matches which are, in view of a notification issued by the State Government under Rule 131, contained in Chapter X of Municipal Manual Volume II, exempt from imposition of such duty. They therefore, have approached this Court for relief under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3. These petitions have been contested on behalf of respondents Prabhari Adlikari, Nagarpalika, Firozabad and Sri B.N. Lal. Executive Officer of the Board, has filed a counter affidavit and has justified the right of the Municipal Board to tealise octroi duty with effect from 8-10-1979 at the rates which were published in the newspaper "Yug Pariwartan" dated 27-9-1978. 4. Facts which are no more in dispute as also those which emerge from the counter-affidavit and correctness .of which we have no reason to doubt, are that the Municipal Board had in the year 1960 levied octroi duty on various articles at the rates mentioned in the octroi schedule. It had also framed necessary rules for assessment recovery of octroi duly in the year i960. The rules and the schedule frata by the Municipal Board Continued to by effective till the month of August, 1977 when the Uttar Prddesh Municipal Board, notified Area and Town Area (Alpkalik Vayawastha) Adhyadesh No. 16 of 1977 which was subsequently replaced by U.P. Act 13 of 1977. came into force on 10.8 1977. Application of U.P. Act 13 of 1977 was subsequently extended and it continued to be enforce at the relevant time. As a result of enforcement of U.P. Ordinance 16 of 1977 all members of the Municipal Board as also its President ceased to hold their respective offices and all powers, -functions and duties of the Municipal Board, its President and Committee were to be vested in and executed, performed and discharged by the District Magistrate. On 11.8.1979 office of the Municipal Board put up a note that the existing octroi schedule had been in force without any change from the year 1961. On 11.8.1979 office of the Municipal Board put up a note that the existing octroi schedule had been in force without any change from the year 1961. In the year 1975 the Board had passed resolutions for making changes in the schedule and the necessary papers had also been forwarded to the Mate Government. However, at that stage the changes proposed by the Board were not approved as the State Government was preparing a model ocroi schedule for levy of octroi duty so as to bring uniformity in such levy throughout the State. The State Government had framed the model octroi schedule and had directed that the Municipal Board to frame their octroi schedules on the basis of the model octroi schedules prepared by it. Accordingly, fresh rules and octroi schedules have been drafted and it was being forwarded for necessary action. The office also pointed out that in this connection it would be necessary for the Administrator to pass a special resolution which will have to be published in the newspapers for inviting objections from the public. The office note along with its comments and the draft rules containing schedule of new rates were then placed before the Administrator, Municipal Board for passing necessary special resolution. The Administrator on 28.9.1978 passed the resolution and directed that further steps in that regard be taken. It was thereafter that the notice dated 27 9.1978 was published in newspaper "Yug Priwartan" and objection to the same were invited by the Executive Officer. A number of persons filed objections to the amendments proposed to be made in the octroi rate schedule. Ori 27.12.78 the District Magistrate asked the Additional District Magistrate to dispose of the objections received .in pursuance of the notice published on 27.9.1978. However before those objections could be disposed of by the Additional District Magistrate the District Magistrate on 15.1.1979 deligated his power to dispose of the objections to the Prescribed Authority. Accordingly, when the objection were put for orders before the Additional District Magistrate on 31.1.1979 he wrote a letter to the District Magistrate informing him of the delegation made by him on 15.1.1979 and expressed the view that the objections could appropriately be dealt with by the Prescribed Authority. Accordingly, when the objection were put for orders before the Additional District Magistrate on 31.1.1979 he wrote a letter to the District Magistrate informing him of the delegation made by him on 15.1.1979 and expressed the view that the objections could appropriately be dealt with by the Prescribed Authority. On receipt of the afore mentioned communication from the Additional District Magistrate, the District Magistrate passed an order on 3.2 1979 to the effect that the said authority would stand delegated to the Prescribed Authority. Thereafter, the papers were forwarded to the Prescribed Authority for disposal of the objections. The Prescribed Authority fixed February 16 and 17. 1979 for hearing the objection. Eventually, the Prescribed Authority vide his order dated 22.2.1979 rejected all the objection The proposals made by the Administrator for change in the octroi rate schedule along with the objections and the order of the Prescribed Authority were for warded to the State Government which by means of a letter dated 30.8.1979 addressed to the Commissioner, Agra Division sanctioned the alternative in the octroi schedule proposed by the Municipal Board. Thereafter, the Administrator again passed a special resolution on 4.9.1979 fixing 8 10.1979 as the date thoria which r.he amended octroi schedule was to be effected and the revised octroi rate schedule, was also published in the Gazette of Uttar Pradesh dated 8.10.1979. 5. The procedure which governs the levy and imposition of a tax in the nature of octroi duty to laid down in Sections 131 to 135 of the Act. The power to impose such a tax is that of the Board which, under the provisions of the Act, is not capable of being delegated Section 131 of the Act requires that for imposing such tax the Board has to by special resolution and frame proposal specifying. (a) ........ (b) The person or class of persons to be made liable, and the description of property or other taxable filing or circumstances in respect of which they are to be made liable, except where and in so far as any such cause or description is already sufficiently defined under clause (a) or by this Act; (c) The amount of rate leviable from each such person or class of persons; (d) .................... Thereupon the proposal along with the draft rules prepared by the Board have to be published and objections to the proposal invited. Thereupon the proposal along with the draft rules prepared by the Board have to be published and objections to the proposal invited. Section 132 of the Act enables the inhabitants to file objections and obliges the Board to consider those objections and if necessary to modify its proposals accordingly and to finally settle its proposals. Thereafter the papers have to be forwarded under Section 133 to the State Government which is empowered either to reject, sanction or modify the proposals. When the proposals are received by the Municipal Board after being sanctioned by the- State Government. the Municipal Beard is, under Section 134, required to pass a special resolution fixing the date from which the tax is to be imposed. Section 135 of the Act requires the resolution passed by the Board fixing the date or imposing the tax from a particular date to be.submitted to the State Government which notifies the imposition of the tax from the appointed date in the Gazette ; and sub section (3) of Section 135 lays down that a notification of the imposition of tax published by the State Government in official Gazette shall be conclusive proof that the tax has been imposed in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Section 135 of the Act then provides that the procedure for altering a tax in respect of the persons or class of persons to be made liable and the description of property or other taxable things or circumstances in respect of which they are to be made liable as also the amount of rate leviable from such persons or class of persons shall, so far as may be, be the same as prescribed by Sections 131 to 135 of the Act. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners did not dispute that after coming into force of the U. P. Ordinance entitled "U. P. Municipalities, Notified Area and Town Area Alpkalik Vayawashha) Adhyadesh, 1977 all powers, functions and duties of the Municipal Board as also that of its President and Committees vested in the District Magistrate who was for the purposes of Municipal administration also termed as Administrator, and that the District Magistrate could make changes in the octroi schedule in his capacity of the Municipal Board. He, however, contended that like the Municipal Board, the District Magistrate could also not delegate his functions with regard to imposition of octroi duties and making changes therein, to anybody Accordingly, unless there was a special resolution for the purpose under Section 131 passed by the District Magistrate and consideration of the objections by him, no resolution could be forwarded to the State Government for according sanction and no change in the existing octroi rate schedule could be effected. Section 2 (1) of the Ordinance lays down that on its coming into force the provisions of the U. P. Municipalities Act of 1916 are to, so long as the Ordinance remains effective or the Municipal Board is not reconstituted, be subject to the provisions contained therein. Section 4 (2) of the Ordinance runs thus; - "Subject to any general or special orders of the State Government the District Magistrate may in respect of or any of the power conferred on him by clause (b) of sub-section (1) delegate subject to such conditions as he may think St to impose, powers so conferred to any one or more persons or authority to be specified by him in that behalf." Accordingly notwithstanding the provisions of the U.P. Municipalities Act which made the power of the Board with regard to imposition of or making any change in octroi duty, non-deligatable, the District Magistrate who came to be vested with that power under the provisions of the U.P. Municipalities, Notified Areas and Town Areas (Alpkalik Vyawastha) Adhyadesh became competent to delegate such power subject to such condition as he may think fit to impose to the authority specified by him. Accordingly, if a particular function with regard to making alteration in the octroi duty has not been performed by some offer authority, the imposition would not stand vitiated if it is shown that the District Magistrate had empowered that authority to perform that function. 7. The case of the petitioners before us was that the proposal for making changes in the octroi duty has been published in the newspaper "Yug Pariwartan" under the signatures of the Executive Officer of the Board. 7. The case of the petitioners before us was that the proposal for making changes in the octroi duty has been published in the newspaper "Yug Pariwartan" under the signatures of the Executive Officer of the Board. This shows that the proposals had been framed and objections with regard to the same invited by the Executive Officer of the Board and there being no delegation by the District Magistrate to the Executive Officer, of his power to frame proposal for imposition of the tax. the very foundation for making changes in the octroi duty by the Executive Officer was missing and the entire proceedings following the same passing of proposal by the Executive Officer were without authority of law. 8. We find no merit in this submission. The office proposal for making alteration in the octroi schedule together with the amendments proposed to be made therein were put up before the District Magistrate (Administrator) The District Magistrate passed a special resolution approving the changes proposed to be made in the rate of schedule. This was the preliminary proposal made by him in accordance with Section 131 of the Act, in his capacity as this Board. The preliminary proposal was thus framed by she District Magistrate himself in his capacity as the Board and not by the Executive Officer. In the circumstances it cannot be said that the preliminary proposal for making changes in the octroi schedule under Section 131 of the Act was framed by the Executive Officer who had not been authorised by the District Magistrate to frame the same and the change made in the octroi schedule cannot be impugned on the ground that the preliminary proposal under Section 131 of the Act had not been framed by the District Magistrate himself. 9. After the special resolution is passed by the Board, the Board is required to publish the same under sub-section (3) of Section 131 of the Act. It is contended that in this case the Board did not itself publish the special resolution passed by it, instead the same was published under the authority of the Executive Officer of the Board and the publication, according to the petitioners, is not in accordance with Section 131 (3) of the Act and the proceedings for making alteration its the octroi schedule stand vitiated. In our Opinion publication of Boards special resolution by its Executive Officer amounts to is publication by the Board it self Moreover, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Boland Sugar Co. Ltd. Rampur v. The Municipal Board Rampur, [1965 S.C. 895], the requirement in Section 131 of f the Act with regard to manner of publication is directory and any irregularity therein does not effect the tax after publication of a notification under Section 135 (2) of the Municipalities Act, which admittedly has been published in this case. Accordingly as provided in sub-section (3) of Section 135 it will have to be taken that publication of special resolution under Section 131 of the Municipalities Act passed by the Board was in accordance with the Act. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners then objected to the consideration of various objections to the proposal published under Section 131 of the Act by the Prescribed Authority on the ground that the authority to consider the objections had not been delegated to him. Annexure C-6 to the counter-affidavit clearly shows that authority to dispose of the objection received in connection with the proposal for making changes in the octroi list had been delegated by the District Magistrate to the Prescribed Authority vide order dated 15.1.1979 and that the said delegation was further confirmed by him on 3.2.1979. The proceedings for alteration of octroi duty are, therefore, not vitiated on this ground. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners then contended that while making alteration in the octroi rates schedule under Section 136 of the U.P. Municipalises Act, the Municipal Board could merely alter the rate of octroi on the commodities which had already been subjected to octroi duty. According to him it was not open to the Municipal Board to prescribe rates in respect of an article like coal which bad not at all been included in the schedule originally prescribing late of octrai duty He contended that prescription of rates in respect of articles not already covered by the Schedule would amount to imposition of fresh octroi duty on that article and it would not merely be alteration contemplated by Section 136 of the Act. In our opinion there is on merit in this submission. In our opinion there is on merit in this submission. Section 136 of the Act clearly contemplates a change in a tax of the nature of octroi duty, in respect of matters specified in clause (b) of Section 131, which inter alia covers properties or other taxable things." Accordingly, apart from changes being made in respect of rates of octroi duty that have been prescribed under clause (3) of Section 131, Section 136 of the Act also convenances changes being made in the `property or taxable things prescribed by Section 131 (b). We are, therefore, of opinion that it was open to the Municipal Board to effect changes in the schedule of octroi rates by bringing therein few dutiable commodities as well. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner next contended that the preliminary resolution approved and passed by the District Magistrate on 28-9.1908 proposing to effect a change in the schedule of octroi was not in consonance with Section 131 of the Act, and the entire proceedings for changing the octori schedule were vitiated. 13. The agenda that was put up before the District Magistrate for passing the special resolution translated into English reads thus: - "Report of the prescribed Authority, Nagarpalika Firozabad that in order to strengthen the financial condition of the Board the amendments in the octroi schedule attached herewith to he considered for passing a special resolution." The District Magistrate accepted the proposal and directed that further action be taken accordingly. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the'resolution did not Specify the matters which are required to be specified in it by Section 131 of the Act. In our opinion the special resolution passed by the District Magistrate dated 28.9.1978 in substance amounts to a resolution that the changes mentioned in the octroi rate schedule which was attached to the agenda be effected and the octroi rates schedule be amended accordingly. The resolution read along with the amendments proposed to the octroi rates schedule which were attached to the agenda, in our opinion, substantially complies with the provisions of Section 131 of the Act. The resolution read along with the amendments proposed to the octroi rates schedule which were attached to the agenda, in our opinion, substantially complies with the provisions of Section 131 of the Act. At any rate after a notification imposing tax under sub-section (2) of Section 135 of the Act has been published it will have to be taken that the provisions of the Act in this regard have been, as provided in Section 135 (3) of the Act, fully complied with and the imposition or changes made in the tax cannot be said to be vitiated on this ground. We are in this view fully supported by the derision of the Supreme Court in the case Ram Boland Sugar Co. Ltd. Rampur v. The Municipal Board, Rampur, (1965 SC 895). 14. We now come to the last submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, namely, that the State Government had under Section 157 (3) of the Act made an order exempting salt, drugs and matches from payment of ocroi duty (rule 131, Chapter X of the Municipal Manual Volume II) In the circumstances the changes made in the octroi schedule for levy of octroi on such items is without jurisdiction. 15. In oui opinion this point raised by the petitioner stands concluded by the full Bench decision of this Court in the case of M/s. Central Distellery & Chemical Works Ltd. and others v. date of U.P. and others, (1979 U. P. T. C. 1206), wherein it was held that: "Section 153 (3) of the U.P. Municipalities Act conferring power of exemption on the State Government comes into play after a tax has been imposed. It does not entitled the State Government to exempt from payment of a tax where the tax has not been imposed at all. The order dated 1-3-1961 granting exemption will not be applicable to the Municipal Board of Meerut in relation to excisable liquor because no octroi was imposed on it by this municipality at any time before 1-3-1961. That order cannot be construed to mean exemption from payment of hypothetical tax which may be imposed in future. The order dated 1-3-1961 granting exemption will not be applicable to the Municipal Board of Meerut in relation to excisable liquor because no octroi was imposed on it by this municipality at any time before 1-3-1961. That order cannot be construed to mean exemption from payment of hypothetical tax which may be imposed in future. The order of the State Government sanctioning the imposition of octroi by notification of January 4, 1975 being latter, will supersede the exemption order of March 1, 1971 in relation to the Municipality of Meerut and in respect of liquor manufactured in India Rule 131 in 1925 did not relate to the power of imposition but on the execution of that power, by levying or quantifying the tax exemption few on excisable liquor manufactured in India. Since the Municipal Board of Meerut imposed the octroi by notification of January 4, 1975, rule 131 hence was ineffective in relation to the Municipal Board, Meerut. Hence the imposition as well as the levy of octroi on Indian made foreign liquor as well as country liquor was valid." We find that in the instant case salt, drugs and matches have been included by the Municipal Board Firozabad in the list of octroiable commodities with the approval of the State Government of the year 1925. Applying the aforementioned observation made by the Full Bench to the facts of the present case, we find that it is not possible for the petitioners to take exception to imposition of octroi on salt, drugs and matches on the basis of rule 131 which in so far an Municipal Board Firozabad is concerned was in effective. 16. In the result, we find no merit in any of these petitions which are dismissed with costs.