S. H. SHETH, S. L. TALATI, J.

( 1 ) P G Textile Mills Ltd. a company is the petitioner. It runs a textile mill at Baroda. The company had been discharging trade effluents in the drains maintained by Baroda Municipal Corporation and was paying the Corporation a certain amount fixed in pursuance of the bye laws made under the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963 On 13th December 1978 Baroda Municipal Corporation passed Resolution enhancing the surcharge payable by the petitioner on the discharge of its trade affluents in the municipal drains. It is the petitioners case that the payments charged by the Corporation under different heads connected with the discharge of its trade effluents in the municipal drains have in some cases been doubled and in some other cases they have been more than doubled.

( 2 ) IT is this increase in the surcharge effected by Baroda Municipal Corporation by its Resolution dated 13th December 1978 which is challenged in this petition.

( 3 ) MR. Nanavaty who appears on behalf of the petitioner has raised before us the following contentions:- (1) Bye laws framed by Baroda Municipal Borough under the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963 were ultra vires sec. 275 of that Act. (2) In any case those bye laws ceased to be operative with the constitution of Baroda Municipal Corporation and the application of the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act 1949 (3) The Resolution dated 13th December 1978 passed by Baroda Municipal Corporation is without authority and is illegal because procedure required to be followed in a matter of such a type was not followed by Baroda Municipal Corporation. (4) The surcharge which the petitioner is required to pay to Baroda Municipal Corporation is in the nature of fees and it is invalid because there is no quid pro quo. (5) While revising the surcharge by the Resolution dated 13th December 1978 Baroda Municipal Corporation has fixed permissible limits of trade effluents arbitrarily. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

( 4 ) WHAT are challenged as ultra vires sec. 275 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963 are bye laws 9 (9) 9 (10) 11 and 12. Bye laws 9 (9) and 9 provides as under:-9 No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any of the following described kinds of sewage industrial or factory wastes; into any sewer or body of water within or entering the Municipal area. . . . . . . . . (9) Any waters or waste containing toxic or poisonous solids liquid or gases in sufficient quantity either singly or by interaction with other wastes likely to injure or interfere with any sewage treatment. . . process constitute a hazard to humans or animals create a public nuisance or create any hazard in the receiving waters of the sewage treatment plant including but not limited to; (A ). . (B ). . (C ). . . (10) Any waters or wastes containing constituents such as but not limited to the following in objectionable concentration which in the opinion of the Hydraulic Engineer are likely to interfere with sewage treatment or exceed limits after treatment of the sewage to meet the requirements of the State or other public or local authorities for discharge to the receiving water:-BYE law 11 provides as follows:- 11 At such time as the municipal sewage works are not over loaded the Hydraulic Engineer may at his discretion permit great degree of pollution than set out in bye law 9 (16) and (17) but in no case exceeding the following: -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BYE law 12 which is material for the purpose of the present case provides as follows:- 12 The permission mentioned in bye law 11 will be given only upon payment of surcharge in addition to the usual sewer charges and it will be liable to be withdrawn on 3 months notice. The rates for surcharge will be decided by the Municipality from time to time. It is under bye law 12 made under the Gujarat Municipal ties Act 1963 that the municipality collects from the petitioner sewer charges and is no

Click Here to Read the rest of this document