Hansaria, C.J (Acting)- A private market used to sit once a week on the land belonging to Fatemabad Tea Estate. This was for the convenience^ of the workmen and really to cater to the needs of the, labourers. The land has since been handed over to the Gaon-Panchayat to run the bazar, "he Tea Estate was, -however, asked to pay a sum of Rs. 7000-00 per year vide letter dated 30.10.81 {Annexure-A) from the Chief Executive Councillor, Mihkuma Parishad Barpeta, as licence fee for holding a private bazar within the area of Fatemabad Tea Estate. It was also asked to pay arrear of licence fee from 1973-74. In this way, a sum; of Rs. 56,000/- became due by 1981. The validity of this levy has been assailed in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2 Shri Bhattacharjee has advanced a very short submission which is that the Executive Committee of the Barpeta Mahkuma Parishad within whose jurisdiction the Gaon Panchayat falls could not have levied the licence fee inasmuch as under section 66 of the Assam Panchayati Raj, Act, 1972, hereinafter the Act, this power vests in a Gaon Panchayat. This would be amply borne out by clause i) (a) of the aforesaid section. As per sub-section (3) of the aforesaid section, any person aggrieved by the assessment, levy or imposition of any tax, cess or rate may appeal within 30 day of the assessment notice to the Chief Executive Councillor of the Mahkuma Parishad. The power of taxation of the Mahkuma Parishad has been dealt with in section 69 of the Act. As per clause (c) of sub-section (1) of the aforesaid section, a licence fee can be imposed by the Mahkuma Parishad only on cinema halls and other establishments, in which no reference has been made to a private market or hat. 3. Placed in this situation, Shri Chaliha, learned Government Advocate, Assam submits that the levy had, in fact, been imposed by the Gaon Panchayat in question leaving the realisation part of the licence fee on the Mahkuma Parishad. To satisfy us in this regard, our attention has been invited to Resolution No. 6 a op­ted in the meeting of the Gaon Panchayat held on 4.9.81, a trans­lated copy of which is to be found in Annexure-I of the affidavit in opposition. To satisfy us in this regard, our attention has been invited to Resolution No. 6 a op­ted in the meeting of the Gaon Panchayat held on 4.9.81, a trans­lated copy of which is to be found in Annexure-I of the affidavit in opposition. A reading of this Resolution shows that Mabkuma Parishad was authorised "to assess and reilise licence fee from 1972". .This would show that the Gaon Panchayat itself had not decided to assess the tax. It may be pointed out here that there is also no resolution of the Gaon Pahchayat before us showing any decision by it to impose tax on the Bazar in question. It would be useful to point out at this stage that under Rule 88 of the Assam Panchayati Raj (Financial) Rules, 1974, the maximum amount of tax that can be levied on a private hat or market is Rs. 7000.00 per annum. As the Gaon Panchayat had not decided' the rate at Which to levy the tax and has left this matter to the discretion of the Mahkuma Parishad, as would appear from Resolution No. 6, we are not satisfied if a valid decision has been taken by the Gaon Panchayat to levy tax' at the rate of Rs. 7,000.00 per annum. 4. In view of the aforesaid, we cannot sustain the demand and, there­fore, we set aside the same. The petition is allowed accordingly. It may however, be observed before parting that it would be open to the . Panchayat to take any decision in this regard in accordance with law. S.K. Homchaudhuri, J.- I agree.