The central legal point established in the judgment is that if a road roller is a light motor vehicle, then it is a motor vehicle and can be taxed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Judgement

JUDGMENT :- These appeals are against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 27th March, 1998.

2. The appellants had issued G.O.Ms. No. 75, dated 27th April, 1993 by which the road tax on vehicles was increased. That G.O. was challenged in a writ petition bearing No. 7315 of 1993 which came to be dismissed. The G.O. was held to be valid. Thereafter, the respondents filed writ petitions claiming that road rollers were not motor vehicles under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and hence no tax could be levied on road rollers.

3.The High Court in the impugned judgment holds that the imposition of tax was authorised by Entry 57 of List II of Schedule VII of the Constitution of India and that pursuant thereto the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963 permitted levying of tax on vehicles using the roads. The High Court placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in the case of Bolani Ores Ltd. v. State of Orissa, reported in (1974) 2 SCC 777, and held that before vehicles could be taxed they must be adapted/suitable for use on roads. The High Court noticed the definition of Motor Vehicle under S. 2(28) as well as the definition of Light Motor Vehicle under S. 2(21) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The High Court still concluded that a road roller was not suitable for use on roads because it was meant only for laying roads and was not meant for transporting people or goods from place to place. The High Court held that connotation of vehicle itself meant a conveyance for carrying people or goods. The High Court clarified that even though G.O.Ms. No. 75 had been upheld, no tax could be imposed on road rollers.

4. Undoubtedly, the power to impose taxes on vehicles is derived from Entry 57 of List II of Schedule VII of the Constitution of India. This permits levy of taxes on vehicles, whether mechanically propelled or not, suitable for use on roads. The Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963 does not define what is a vehicle. It, however, provides that definition will be as given in the Motor Vehicles Act. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 defines a "Motor Vehicle" under S. 2(28) as follows :-

"2(28) "motor vehicle" or "vehicle" means any mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads whether the power of propulsion is transmitted thereto from an external or internal source and includes a chassis to which a body has not been attached and a trailer; but does not include a vehicle running upon fixed rails or a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises or a vehicle having less than four wheels fitted with engine capacity of not exceeding (twenty five cubic centimetres)."

Therefore any vehicle which is mechanically propelled and which is adapted for use upon roads falls within this definition. Further S. 2(21) defines a "Light Motor Vehicle" as follows :-

"2(21) "light motor vehicle" means a transport vehicle or omnibus the gross vehicle weight of either of which or a motor car or tractor or road roller the unladen weight of any of which, does not exceed (7500) kilograms."

It is to be seen that a road roller is specifically included in the definition of a light motor vehicle. If a road roller is a light motor vehicle then it is a motor vehicle. It is settled law that if the intention of the Legislature is clear and unambiguous, then Courts cannot ignore clear wording and hold to the contrary. As the Act categorically provides that a road roller is a motor vehicle we fail to understand how the High Court, even after noticing the AIR 1975 SC 17 definition, could have held that road roller was not a motor vehicle.

5. Even otherwise, we cannot understand the reasoning of the High Court. Undoubtedly, a road roller is meant for repairing roads. This itself shows that it is adapted for use on roads. A road roller is not capable of being used off road. Merely because its purpose is to repair roads does not mean that it is not suitable or not adapted for use on