Judgment Barin Ghosh and Ramesh Kr.Datta JJ. 1. The Village Chaukidari Act, 1870, among others, provides for collection of chaukidari tax for the purpose of meeting the salary of the chaukidars. The Act authorizes appointment of panchayats who, in turn, have been authorized by the Act to appoint one of them as the chaukidari tax collecting agent. The purpose of collection of such lax, as would be evidenced from the plain and simple words used in the Act, was to meet the requirements for payment of salary of chaukidars to be appointed to guard and protect the villagers. 2. Since coming into force of the Act, Panchayats have been appointing collecting agents. In 1892 Sec. 46A was added to the Act. That Section authorized the .District Magistrate to appoint a Tahsildar at any time, on the application of the Panchayat of any village, or of his own motion if, in his opinion, the collection of the rate is badly carried out, or if the chowkidar is not regularly paid, to assist the person collecting the rate. The Section authorised the Tahsildar to exercise all the powers vested in the Panchayat for collection of the rate. The Section also authorized the District Magistrate to revoke such appointment. Sec. 46B of the Act directed that the remuneration of the Tahsildar be paid at such rate and in such manner as the District Magistrate may from time to time, with the sanction of the Commissioner of the Division, prescribe and such remuneration will be levied from those who have failed to pay chaukidari tax. Since then it appears that the entire obligation of collecting chaukidari tax was taken over by Tahsildars so appointed. The collecting agents appointed by the panchayats were no more in the scene as has been accepted in the present proceedings. Tahsildars started getting an uniform percentage of the tax collected by them as and by way of their remuneration and not at any specified rate prescribed by the District Magistrate and collected from the tax defaulters. 3. As the time passed on, the State found that appointment of the chaukidars is a must for the safety, security and protection of the rural areas. The State tound that chowkidars appointed under the Act, at times, are not being appropriately remunerated. The State found that there is difference in the salary payable to chowkidars appointed under the Act. 3. As the time passed on, the State found that appointment of the chaukidars is a must for the safety, security and protection of the rural areas. The State tound that chowkidars appointed under the Act, at times, are not being appropriately remunerated. The State found that there is difference in the salary payable to chowkidars appointed under the Act. The State, in the circumstances, long time back took upon itself the responsibility of paying the salary of chowkidars so appointed under the Act. There is no dispute that chowkidars are being paid their salaries from the State exchequer. Since then chaukidari tax collected by Tahsildars, after payment of their commission, is being deposited with the State exchequer. The State has found that the amount of chowkidari tax as is being collected is negligible. On the other hand, in the matter of collection of such tax, there is discrimination in between people living in different villages under the domain of different Panchayats. The State has, therefore, decided not to collect tax, which it is authorized to collect under the said Act. 4. The principal appellant, who is the association of such Tahsildars, in the writ petition contended that they should be absorbed as Government servants or their commission should be increased. In relation to the first contention it was stated that they are similarly placed with those Tahsildars who had been appointed in Chhotanagpur area under the Chhotanagpur Rural Police Act, 1914. In terms of the Chotanagpur Rural Police Act, Chowkidars/ Tahsildars were appointed by the Deputy Commissioner on full time basis on the pay fixed by the Deputy Commissioner under the said Act. Tahsildars acting under the Chhotanagpur Rural Police Act, 1914 at no point of time got any part of the tax collected by them as commission, instead they, from the date of their appointment, were salaried persons in a fixed time scale of pay. That is, the distinction in between the Tahsildars appointed under the Chhotanagpur Rural Police Act, 1914 and the Tahsildars appointed under the Act. The principal appellant is, therefore, not entitled to compare its members with Tahsildars appointed under the Chhotanagpur Rural Police Act, 1914 . One of the purposes of the 1870 Act was to ensure payment of salary of chowkidars to be appointed under the said Act. In order to ensure such salary, the Act authorized imposition of chowkidari tax. The principal appellant is, therefore, not entitled to compare its members with Tahsildars appointed under the Chhotanagpur Rural Police Act, 1914 . One of the purposes of the 1870 Act was to ensure payment of salary of chowkidars to be appointed under the said Act. In order to ensure such salary, the Act authorized imposition of chowkidari tax. In order to collect such tax, the Act authorised appointment of Tahsildars. In order to remunerate Tahsildars, the Act authorized payment to them a part of the tax collected by them as and by the Commission. Tahsildars appointed under the 1870 Act, therefore, never worked on full time basis, instead they worked as commission agents. Question of absorbing commission agents does not arise. 5. Inasmuch as the salary payable to the Chowkidars has now been assured by the State itself, if the State decides not to collect chowkidari tax under the Act, the collecting agents of such tax cannot compel the State to continue to collect such tax. When there is no collection of tax, question of paying any commission for collection thereof either at the same rate or at enhanced rate does not arise. 6. Principally for these reasons there is no scope of interference with the judgment and order under appeal and as such the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.