1970 Supreme(Pat) 131

PATNA HIGH COURT
S.C.Misra and B.D.Singh JJ.
Patna Electric Supply Co.Ltd.
Versus
Patna Municipal Corporation
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 220 of 1968 ;
Decided On : AUGUST 31, 1970

The expression "goods or other things" occurring in Section 262 of the Corporation Act cannot be interpreted to include electric poles.

Headnote:

ELECTRICITY ACT - SECTIONS 3, 12, 13, 18, 19 - TELEGRAPH ACT - SECTIONS 10, 12, 15, 19A - PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT - SECTION 262 - RENT FOR LAND OCCUPIED BY ELECTRIC POLES - POWER OF CORPORATION TO LEVY - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES - EJSUDEM GENERIS RULE - APPLICABILITY.

Fact of the Case:

The Patna Electric Supply Co. Ltd. (petitioner) held the interest as an assignee of the Patna-Binapore Electric Licence, 1923 granted by the Government of Bihar and prissa under the Indian Electric Companies Act, 1910 (Electricity Act) to M/s. Octavius Steel & Co. Ltd., for supplying electrical energy in the area specified under the licence. The petitioner entered into several agreements with the Patna City Municipality and the Patna Administration Committee from time to time for providing electric lights on the street for the benefit of general public with lamp of various candle powers, and the Patna Administration Committee and the Patna City Municipality undertook to make payment to the petitioner and various rates according to the candle power. The Patna City Municipality and the Patna Administration Committee were subsequently substituted by the Patna Municipal Corporation, constituted under Patna Municipal Corporation Act (Bihar Act XIII of 1952) (Corporation Act). Acting under Sec. 51 of the Electricity Act the State Government by Notification No. 64-Elec., dated the 11th August, 1966, published in the issue of the Bihar Gazette of that date (Annexure 15) conferred upon the petitioner additional powers for placing of electric supply lines, appliances and apparatus for the transmission and distribution of energy as provided under Sections 10 to 18 and 19A of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (Telegraph Act). The petitioner in order to supply electric energy to respondent No. 1, erected several electric poles on the street and other places which were entrusted to respondent No. 1 by the State of Bihar under the Corporation Act. On December 8, 1967 (Vide Annexure A) the respondent No. 2 demanded from the petitioner fee for the lands occupied by it for fixing electric poles in the Corporation area and called upon the petitioner to intimate to him the total number of electric poles erected by the petitioner within the limits of the Corporation and also about the area occupied by each pole. The petitioner protested against the said demand by its letter dated December 26. 1967 (Annexure B) stating therein that it was not at all liable to pay rent for the land occupied and the poles so fixed for supplying electric energy. On the same day, i.e., December 26, 1967, the respondent No. 2 under his letter (Annexure C) intimated to the petitioner his order imposing a ground rent of Rs. 1.50 paise per month and forwarded a bill to the petitioner for Rs. 51,300.00 in respect of the rent alleged to be due for the month of December, 1967. Respondent No. 2 In the said letter also held out a threat that if the rent demanded was not paid, coercive processes under Sections 205 and 206 of the Corporation Act would be taken against the petitioner. The petitioner per its letter of December 30, 1967 (Annexure D) again repudiated its liability to pay any rent for the same. As per letter of January 4, 1968 (Annexure E) respondent No. 3 intimated to the petitioner that although the latter could fix poles on the public street for supplying electric energy, the Corporation was entitled to levy ground rent for fixing electric poles under Sec.262 of the Corporation Act and further directed the petitioner for the payment of the bill which was already sent to it, within a prescribed period otherwise necessary action would be taken against it for the realisation of the said amount.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Corporation had no power under the Corporation Act to levy rent for the area of land occupied by the poles on the streets and by-lanes situated within the Corporation area. The court further held that the demand of rent made on behalf of the Patna Municipal Corporation under Annexures H and K cannot be sustained. The court also held that the claim of the contesting respondents for compensation for damages also cannot be entertained.

Issues: 1. Whether the Corporation had the power to levy rent for the area of land occupied by the poles on the streets and by-lanes situated within the Corporation area? 2. Whether the demand of rent made on behalf of the Patna Municipal Corporation under Annexures H and K can be sustained? 3. Whether the claim of the contesting respondents for compensation for damages can be entertained?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the expression "goods or other things" occurring in Section 262 of the Corporation Act cannot be interpreted to include electric poles. The court applied the ejusdem generis rule of statutory interpretation and held that the general expression "goods or other things" is to be read as comprehending only things of the same kind as that designated by the preceding particular expressions, unless there is something to show that a wide sense was intended. 2. The court held that the petitioner had fixed the poles under the powers derived from the Electricity Act coupled with the powers contained under Sections 10 to 18 and 19A of the Telegraph Act and it has not committed any unauthorised act contrary to the provisions contained under these two Acts. Therefore, the Corporation or its authority could not have removed the poles acting under Sec.262 of the Corporation Act nor could they have claimed any rent. 3. The court held that the petitioner has not committed any breach of the provisions contained under the Electricity Act and the Telegraph Act. Therefore, the contesting respondents could not have removed the poles or in lieu of such removal could not have collected any rent for the area of lands occupied by the electric poles, under Sec.262 of the Corporation Act.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ application with costs of Rs. 200.00 only and quashed the demands for rent made by respondents 1 to 4 under Annexures H and K. The court also restrained the respondents from making any such demand from the petitioner in future as the law stands.