SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Bom) 325

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE
R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR & V.M. KANADE, JJ.
Bharti Tele-Ventures Limited, Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra Respondents
Advocate Appeared
Aspi Chinoy and F.E. Devitre, Senior Advocates with Farhan Dubhash, Nusarat Hasan, Ms Neha Pathak and Prakash Dande, Advocates M/s. D.H.
Law Associates for the Petitioners.
Shri Pradip Patil, Asst. Government Pleader, for the Respondent No.1. Sarvasri D.R. Zaiwalla, Senior Advocate with V.G. Muzumdar, Advocate for the Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.7824 OF 2005
DATED: MARCH 08, 2007

Headnote:Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1996 - Sections 124-A and 154(1) - Levy of charges - In respect of development or construction in excess of development - Either in form of taxes or fees - Not within domain of executive power of State Government - Same can be regulated by issuing instructions under Section 154 of MRTP Act. - Question to levy of charges in whatever form, either in taxes or fees, in relation to the development or the construction in excess of development cannot be said to be within the domain of the executive power of the State Government so that the same can be regulated by issuing instructions under Section 154 of the MRTP Act.

       Telegraph Act, 1885 - Sections 4, 10, 12 and 19-B - Notification issued by Government of India in exercise of powers under Section 19-B of Act - Powers of licensees under Section 4 of Act - Licensees cannot exercise powers of telegraph authority in terms of Section 10 of Act - Powers of licensee s restricted - To extent same are delegated under notification issued under Section 19-B of Act. - The licensees under Section 4 of the Telegraph Act are not empowered to exercise the powers of the telegraph authority in terms of Section 10 of the Telegraph Act but their powers are restricted to the extent the same are delegated under the said notification issued under Section 29-B of the Telegraph Act.

JUDGMENT

R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J.

1. Heard the learned Advocates at length. Perused the records.

2. By the present petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the Notification dated 4-7-2005 issued by the respondent No.1 under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, hereinafter called as "the MRTP Act" by which the respondent No.1 has sought to amend its earlier order dated 9-10-1996 and thereby has authorised and/or required various Municipal Corporations in the State to charge retrospectively from 9-10-1996, the premium at the rate of the land value as per the ready reckoner for the area occupied by the cabin, the tower height premium at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per running metre and a deposit of Rs.50,000/- for granting permission under Section 45 of the MRTP Act to the petitioners and the other cellular operators for installing semi-permanent structures/cabins on the top of the building for housing Base Station/Telephone Connector to set-up a cellular mobile tele-communication system, in view of licence granted under Section of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, hereinafter called as "the Telegraph Act" and the demand notices in that respect being Exhibits-E to E-10 annexed to the petition.

3. In and around 1995 the Government of India, pursuant to new telephone policy, decided to allow private operators to provide cellular tele-communication services and pursuant to the said policy, till 2001 issued licence to three cellular operators in the Maharashtra Telecom Circle, namely, BPL, Idea Cellular and VSNL. In the year 2001 the Government decided to allow fourth cellular operator in the Maharashtra Telecom Circle for the State of Maharashtra and Goa and the same was awarded in favour of the petitioner No.1, by issuing the licence under Section 4 of the Telegraph Act, followed by the necessary licence agreement dated 28-9-2001.

4. In furtherance of the said policy, the Urban Development Department of the Government of Maharashtra had issued directives dated 9-10-1996 under Section 154 of the MRTP Act to all the Municipal Corporations in the State, except the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, that the Corporations shall initiate a proposal for modification under Section 37 of the MRTP Act to incorporate a provision in the Development Control Regulations, hereinafter called as "DCRs" to the effect that "The area of one room for installation of telephone connectors as per the requirements of the Department of Telecommunication or the companies authorized on that behalf but not exceeding 20 sqm per building with the written permission of the Commissioner can be permitted free of FSI.". Simultaneously it was clarified that where similar provision had been already existing in the DC Regulations, the same can be made operative to the companies to whom valid license is issued by the Department of Telecommunication. It was also clarified that the decision as per the directives would come into force with immediate effect, pending the decision on the proposal for modification under Section 37 of the MRTP Act. In continuation of the said directives dated 9-10-1996 further directions dated 4-7-2005 under Section 154 r/w Section 37 of the MRTP Act were issued to remove the deficiencies in the directives dated 9-10-1996 and to have a uniform policy in respect of charging of deposit and the premium. The further directions were to the effect that such permission should be granted under Section 45 of the MRTP Act, and deposit of Rs.50,000/- should be charged, the premium shall be charged at the rate of the land value as per the ready reckoner for the area occupied by the cabin, while the tower height premium shall be Rs.10,000/- per running metre, to be effective from 9-10-1996. Besides, under the Notification dated 24-5-1999 issued by the Government of India in exercise of powers under Section 19-B of the Telegraph Act, the holders of the licence under Section 4 of the Telegraph Act were conferred with the power to se









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top