JUDGMENT : 1. By this bunch of writ petitions, a challenge is made to the letters-cum-demand of tax on land and buildings. 2. It is stated that the petitioner-institutions are engaged in education thus could not have been subjected to tax in ignorance of Sections 104 and 107 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (for short “the Act of 1959”). As per Section 107 of the Act of 1959, tax is not imposable on land and building used as a place of public worship or for religious charitable purposes. The Explanation I of Section 107 of the Act of 1959 defines “charitable purpose” which means relief to poor, education and medical relief. In view of the Section 107 of the Act of 1959, any land and building used for charitable purposes are exempted from tax and education is a charitable purpose. The prayer is accordingly to cause interference in the demand of tax on land and building. 3. A reference of the judgment of this Court in the case of Sant Patrick S. Vidhya Bhawan & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in SB Civil Writ Petition No.12517/2015 decided on 23rd April, 2016 has been given. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that by way of the writ petitions, a challenge has also been made to the Notifications dated 29th August, 2007. In the Notifications dated 29th August, 2007, all the land and buildings of the charitable trust and educational institutions have been exempted even if used for commercial purposes. It is subject to an order of the Government. The prayer is to make interpretation of the Notification in consonance to Section 107 of the Act of 1959 to hold that it exempts land and building of an educational institution, though, it provides for an order of the State Government. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. Rajendra Prasad and Mrs. Naina Saraf, counsel for the Municipal Corporation, Jaipur, have contested the writ petitions. It is submitted that demand of tax has rightly been raised against the petitioner-institutions. The tax referred under Section 104 of the Act of 1959 is enforceable against the petitioner-institutions. Section 104 of the Act of 1959 provides for tax on land and buildings. Accordingly, after assessment of the amount of tax, demand has been raised. The petitioner institutions are not exempted from the tax imposable under Section 104 of the Act of 1959. The tax referred under Section 104 of the Act of 1959 is enforceable against the petitioner-institutions. Section 104 of the Act of 1959 provides for tax on land and buildings. Accordingly, after assessment of the amount of tax, demand has been raised. The petitioner institutions are not exempted from the tax imposable under Section 104 of the Act of 1959. Section 107 of the Act of 1959 exempts if land and buildings are used as a place of public worship or religious charitable purpose. The petitioner institutions are not using the land and building for charitable purpose but are earning out of it, even if, involved in education. It is also stated that the provision of Section 107 of the Act of 1959 does not exist in the repealed Act of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (for short “the Act of 2009”) thus if any relief is granted in regard to tax on land and building, then it should be till currency of old the Act of 1959. 6. It is further added that land and buildings belong to petitioner-institutions are even used for commercial purposes. The aforesaid is not exempted from the tax imposable under Section 104 of the Act of 1959. It can be only the part of land and building used for educational purpose. The prayer is to allow the Municipal Corporation to make fresh assessment based on the aforesaid, if an interference is caused in the demand raised by them. 7. It is further stated that challenge to the Notifications has been made but no ground exists to cause interference therein. The Notifications are not in violation to the Constitution of India or beyond the competence of the Authority. Accordingly, challenge to the Notifications may not be accepted. 8. We have considered rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. By this bunch of writ petitions, a challenge is made not only to demand of tax on land and building belonging to the petitioner institutions but even to the Notifications. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner-institutions have made a reference of Sections 104 and 107 of the Act of 1959 thus both the provisions are quoted hereunder for ready reference : “104. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner-institutions have made a reference of Sections 104 and 107 of the Act of 1959 thus both the provisions are quoted hereunder for ready reference : “104. Obligatory Taxes.—Every board shall levy, at such rate and from such date as the State Government may in each case direct by notification in the official Gazette and in such manner as is laid down in this Act and as may be provided in the rules made by the State Government in this behalf, the following taxes, namely:— (1) a tax on the annual letting value of buildings or lands or both, situated within the municipality; (2) An octroi on goods and animals brought within the limits of the municipality for consumption or use or sale therein. Explanation I.—For the purpose of this sub-section meaning of the word ‘Consumption’ shall, with reference to goods and animals brought within the limits of the municipality, include the goods brought inside the area by any person to be delivered to another for using them up whether or not that other person is the ultimate consumer of the goods or animals so delivered in that areas. Explanation II.—For the purpose of this sub-section meaning of the word ‘Use’ shall, with reference to goods and animals brought within the limits of the municipality include the goods brought inside the area for use of any other person whether or not that other person ultimately consumes or uses up the goods or animals. Explanation III.—For the purpose of this sub-section ‘Sale’ of goods or animals shall be deemed to have taken place within the municipal limits if these were brought by the seller within the municipal limits and a contract of sale as contemplated by section 5 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 has taken place between the buyer and seller within the municipal limits whether or not the delivery or payment was deferred at the time of entering into the contract. Deferment of such delivery or payment or both shall be deemed to be an act of postponement of the delivery or payment or both as contemplated by the said section 5 of the said Act of 1930; and”] (3) a tax on professions and vocations; Provided that— (a) the tax under clause (1) shall not be levied— (i) on Kham houses, or (ii) on buildings or lands or both, of which annual letting value is less than one hundred and eighty rupees.] (b) the tax under clause (2) shall not be on a mother vehicle as defined in the Motor Vehicles Act 1939) (Central Act IV of 1939) or any other mechanically propelled vehicle, and (c) the tax under clause (3) shall not be levied on artisans: Provided further that, upon a representation made to it by and at the request of a board, the State Government, if is satisfied that circumstances exist which sufficiently provide the justification for a board not to levy, or to stop the levy of any of the taxes mentioned in this section, may, by special order published in the official Gazette, along with the reasons for making such order, permit the board not to levy, or to stop the levy of any such tax. (2) A direction under sub-section (1) may provide for the levy of taxes at different rates in different municipalities having regard to their varying local conditions and needs, and on the same considerations and by a like direction, the State Govt. may, from time to time.— (i) vary [uniformally] or differently in relation to different Municipalities, the rates of taxes levied, or (ii) withdrawn any tax levied by any Municipalities.] 107. Exemptions from taxation.—(1) None of the taxes specified in sections 104, 105 and 106 shall be leviable by a board in respect of any property belonging to or vested in it. Exemptions from taxation.—(1) None of the taxes specified in sections 104, 105 and 106 shall be leviable by a board in respect of any property belonging to or vested in it. (2) None of the taxes specified in clauses (1) and (2) of section 104 and in clauses (I), (iii), (iv) and (v) of sub-section (1) of section 105 shall be leviable in respect of any lands, buildings, goods, vehicles, conveyances boats or animals belonging to or vested in the Central Government or the State Government: Provided that, so long as any such tax continues to be levied by the board on like properties of other persons nothing in this sub-section shall prevent the board from levying that tax to which, immediately before the 26th day of January 1950 any lands, buildings goods, vehicles, conveyances, boats or animals of the Central Government were liable or treated as liable: Provided further that any land, building, goods vehicle, conveyance, boat or animal belonging to or vested in the State Government shall be so exempt from payment of any such tax if the same is used or intended to be used solely for public purposes and not for purposes of profit. (3) [Omitted—Vide S. 6 of Raj. Act 10 of 1976]. (4) The tax specified in clause (1) of section 104 shall not be leviable in respect of lands and buildings used solely as places of public worship or for religious charitable purposes: Provided that such lands or buildings shall not be exempt from payment of the said tax if any trade or business is carried on therein or if in respect thereof rent or other income is derived, whether such rent or other income is or is not applied exclusively towards such places of public worship or towards such religious or charitable purposes. Explanation I: ‘Charitable purpose’ includes relief of the poor, education and medical relief. Explanation II: When any portion of any land or building is exempt from payment of tax under this sub-section such portion shall be deemed to be a separate property for the purposes of the said tax.” 11. Section 104 of the Act of 1959 talks about obligatory tax, which includes, tax on land and building. Section 107 of the Act of 1959 provides for exemption from payment of the tax. Section 104 of the Act of 1959 talks about obligatory tax, which includes, tax on land and building. Section 107 of the Act of 1959 provides for exemption from payment of the tax. Apart from many categories, it exempts land and building used as a place of public worship or religious charitable purposes. The Explanation I of Section 107 of the Act of 1959 defines the word “charitable purpose”. The definition of charitable purpose includes relief to the poor, education and medical relief. Since education has been included in the definition of charitable purpose, the prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner institutions is to apply it. The petitioner institutions are involved in education, though, learned Additional Advocate General has disputed the aforesaid fact. 12. It is stated that apart from education, the petitioner institutions are using land and buildings for commercial purpose also, which is not for education, thus such land and buildings cannot be exempted from tax under Section 107 of the Act of 1959. 13. We find that assessment of tax and demand has not been made after considering as to whether land and buildings are used for education or part thereof is used even for commercial purpose. Since details aforesaid do not exist thus assessment order and demand as a consequence thereof cannot sustain and are accordingly quashed. The matter thus needs to be remitted back to the respondents to make a fresh assessment after taking into consideration Section 107 of the Act of 1959. If part of land and buildings of the educational institutions are being used for a purpose other than education then it would not be exempted from tax. 14. The assessment of the aforesaid would be after an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner institutions. The petitioner-institutions would be at liberty to show that for the period of tax involved in their cases, no commercial activities were undertaken on the land and buildings in question. In view of the above, while making fresh assessment, the aforesaid would be taken note of. The subsequent period after the year 2009 would be dealt with as per the provisions of the Act of 2009. It would not be governed by this order as it has been passed in reference to the Act of 1959. 15. The constitutional validity of the Notifications dated 29th August, 2007 have also been challenged. 16. The subsequent period after the year 2009 would be dealt with as per the provisions of the Act of 2009. It would not be governed by this order as it has been passed in reference to the Act of 1959. 15. The constitutional validity of the Notifications dated 29th August, 2007 have also been challenged. 16. Learned counsel for the petitioner institutions could not supply any ground to cause interference in the Notifications. It is not urged that Notifications are hit by the Constitution or is not valid in reference to any provision of the Act of 1959 thus we find no reason to cause interference in the Notifications. 17. Learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation Mrs. Naina Saraf has cited certain judgments of this Court and also of the Apex Court. 18. The judgment in the case of Jai Narayan Vyas University Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. in DB Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.556/2016 decided vide order dated 13th July, 2016 along with connected appeals was in reference to the provisions of the Act of 2009 and not in reference to the Act of 1959 as is the present case. It will have no application to the present case and, otherwise, the issue has not been decided on merit but it allowed the appellants therein to file objection against the demand. 19. The other judgment is in the case of Saint Patricks Vidhya Bhawan & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in SB Civil Writ Petition No.12517/2015 decided vide order dated 23rd April, 2016 along with connected writ petitions. The judgment aforesaid is favourable to the petitioners where demand was quashed in reference to Section 107 of the Act of 1959 though it was made clear that position of law had undergone a sea change after the Act of 2009. The claim herein is not to seek benefits under the Act of 2009 but under the Act of 1959 thus even the aforesaid judgment is not of any assistance to the Municipal Corporation, Jaipur. It is, however, made clear that this judgment would have no application to the period subsequent to the year 2009, rather, decided in regard to the demand in question. 20. The other judgment referred by learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation is in the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Children Book Trust Etc. reported in 1991 Scale (2) 491. 20. The other judgment referred by learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation is in the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Children Book Trust Etc. reported in 1991 Scale (2) 491. The Explanation under Section 115(4) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (for short “the Act of 1957”) is not similar to Section 107 of the Act of 1959. Section 115(4)(a) of the Act of 1957 provides that a society or body should be supported by voluntary contribution and applies its profits, if any, or other income in promoting its objects and does not pay any dividend or bonus to the members. The provision aforesaid is somewhat different than Section 107 of the Municipalities Act of 1959, hence cannot be applied in the instant case. 21. The other judgment, referred by learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation is in the case of Roman Catholic Diocesan Education Society & Anr. Vs. Commissioner, Jaipur Municipal Corporation, Jaipur & Ors. in SB Civil Writ Petition No.3656/2005 decided vide order dated 19th October, 2016 along with connected writ petitions. The writ petitions aforesaid were disposed of in terms of agreement between the parties to send the matter to the Appellate Authority as the question of facts were involved. It is instead of remitting the cases back to the Municipal Corporation. 22. In the instant case, we have remitted the cases back to the Municipal Corporation and, therein, a liberty has been given to assess the amount of tax, if the land and buildings are used for commercial purpose other than for education, as has been permitted in the case of Roman Catholic Diocesan Education Society & Anr. (supra). 23. The writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid. 24. A copy of this order be placed in each connected file.