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

2010 Supreme(Gau) 626

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Amitava Roy and H. Baruah, JJ.
Meghalaya Commercial Truck Owner and Operators Association and Anr. - Appellants
Vs.
State of Meghalaya and Ors. - Respondent
W.P. (C) Nos. 2275 of 2004 and 2241 and 2398 of 2008
Decided On: 20.08.2010

Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: A. Sharma, S. Sharma and D.K. Mishra, Advs.
For Respondents/Defendant: B.P. Todi and B.B. Narzari, Advs.

Headnote:

Constitution of India - Article 265 and 244(2) - Petitioner question the authority and power of the Respondent Slimes to do so - Petitioner and his Durbar seek an appropriate writ to restrain the State Respondents from obstructing his/their lessees from collecting such tolls within - Viewing the striking identicalness of the issues to be attended, the related pleadings being minimally at variance, analogous hearing was the consensus and this adjudication would answer the debate - Held, proposition enunciated in New Delhi Municipal Council, supra, with reference to the power of the municipalities to impose taxes under Article 243X was held to be dependent upon their parent legislations for the bestowal thereof - Their lordships held that in case of municipalities within the State, they would have to be specifically delegated the power to tax by the State Legislature concerned and that the municipalities do not have any independent power to levy tax - That a subordinate legislation to be valid has to be within the scope of the rule making power provided in the statute has been sought to be iterated by citing the decision of the Apex Court - Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Amitava Roy, J.

1. The dissenssus bears on the validity or otherwise of the collection of tolls at the check gates set up by the Respondent District Council, the Syiems of the different Elakas located within the West Khasi Hills District of the State of Meghalaya and their lessees. Whereas the Petitioner in WP (C) 2398/2008 and WP (C) 2421/2008 question the authority and power of the Respondent Syiems to do so, the Petitioner in WP (C) 2275/2004, Syiem of Mylleim and his Durbar seek an appropriate writ to restrain the State Respondents from obstructing his/their lessees from collecting such tolls within the Syiemship. Viewing the striking identicalness of the issues to be attended, the related pleadings being minimally at variance, analogous hearing was the consensus and this adjudication would answer the debate.

2. We have heard Mr. A. Sharma, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. S. Sharma, Advocate for the Petitioner in WP (C) 2398/ 2008 and WP (C) 2421/2008, Dr. B.P. Todi, learned Additional Advocate General, Government of Meghalaya, Mr. B.B. Narzari, learned Standing Council, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council and Mr. D.K. Mishra, Sr. Advocate for the Respondent No. 3 in WP (C) 2398/2008.

3. Skeletally the rival pleadings in pith need be adumbrated to lay the preface for the contentious pleas seeking resolution. The Petitioner in WP (C) 2398/2008 and WP (C) 2421/2008 has introduced itself to be an association of truck owners/operators committed to the cause of its members plying their trucks on public roads including the National Highways laid in the State of Meghalaya. Its members are engaged in the business of transporting coal and agricultural produce for which they utilise the NH 37 and NH 44E (Nongstoin-Shillong Road) which constitute the life line of the coal bearing region(s) of the State as these connect it with the rest of the country. It has alleged that such trucks carrying commercial loads of the aforementioned items while plying on the public roads including NH 44E connecting Nongstoin to Shillong are intercepted at check/toll gates set up by or on behalf of the Khasi Hills District Council (for short hereafter referred to as the Council) and the Respondent Syiemships and are subjected to exactions represented to be tolls without any authority of law. In its pleadings in WP (C) 2398/2008, the Petitioner has enumerated as hereunder eight such points where the trucks of its members are stopped and such payments are realised:

(A) Nongstoin Syiemship check gate at Nongstoin (3 receipts of Rs. 300/-, Rs. 100/- and Rs. 300/-).

(B) Myriaw Syiemship check gate at Markasa(1 receipt of Rs. 50/-).

(C) Hima-Mawlang Syiemship check gate at Mawkohngei (Rs. 100/- without any receipt).

(D) The Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, hereinafter referred to as the "KHADC" check gate at Mairang (Rs. 100/- without any receipt).

(E) KHADC check gate at Nongbri (Rs. 200/- without any receipt).

(F) Syiem of Hima Nongkhlaw check gate at Ladmihri (Rs. 100/- without any receipt).

(G) KHADC check gate at third mile, Upper Shillong (Rs. 200/- without any receipt).

4. While mentioning the amount(s) so extracted in addition to the other collections, the Petitioner has alleged that any refusal to yield to such illegal extortions result in damage to the vehicles as well as physical harm to the drivers and handymen thereof which in turn cause serious disruption of the vehicular movement on the highways and public roads causing traffic snarls every now and then. The Petitioner has referred to various representations submitted by it to the different State authorities as well as the FIRs lodged with the Superintendent of Police, West Khasi Hills, Nongstoin, complaining of the above unlawful activities but to no avail.

5. The Petitioner in WP (C) 2421/2008 has extended these assertions vis-a-vis illegal collections of toll in course of the transportation of the coal by its members from their private forests by using the National Highway No. 37. Accord































































































































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