High Court of Kerala
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. RAVINDRAN
Plant Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd
Versus
The Secretary, Thenhipalam Gram
OP. No. 37578 of 2001 (W)
Decided on : 22-06-2010
LPG Bottling Plant - Licensing Fee - Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, Section 231, 231B, Rules 7, 18, 19 - The court discussed the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, and the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996. It highlighted the legal framework for levying license fees based on daily turnover and machinery capacity, as well as additional fees for belated applications. The court emphasized that the rules empowered the local authority to charge license fees for machinery used in the establishment, including safety and backup equipment, and dismissed the petitioner's contentions regarding the computation of license fees and the applicability of statutory provisions.
Fact of the Case:
The Indian Oil Corporation's Plant Manager petitioned against the demand for license fees and penalty by the Thenhipalam Grama Panchayat for running an LPG bottling plant without a renewed license. The petitioner disputed the capacity of machinery and the computation of license fees.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Panchayat's demand for license fees and penalty was justified under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, and the 1996 rules. It dismissed the petitioner's contentions regarding the computation of license fees, the applicability of statutory provisions, and the limitation on fee recovery.
Issues: Dispute over license fees, machinery capacity, and the applicability of statutory provisions under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Panchayat's demand for license fees and penalty was justified under the legal framework provided by the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, and the 1996 rules. It emphasized that the rules empowered the local authority to charge license fees for machinery used in the establishment, including safety and backup equipment.
Final Decision: The original petition was dismissed, and the Panchayat was directed to renew the license upon payment of the entire amount of license fees within one month from the date of receipt of the judgment.
1. The Plant Manager of the LPG Bottling Plant established by the Indian Oil Corporation within the local limits of Thenhipalam Grama Panchayat, in Malappuram District is the petitioner in this original petition.
2. The Indian Oil Corporation established the bottling plant within the local limits of Thenhipalam Grama Panchayat in the year 1992-93. After the plant was established, they applied for a licence under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayats (Licensing of Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1963. Such a licence was granted and it was renewed up to 31.3.1995. In the meanwhile, the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 was enacted and brought into force. The Government thereupon issued the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996. The Indian Oil Corporation did not however apply for renewal of the licence issued under the erstwhile rules. The Secretary, Thenhipalam Grama Panchayat thereupon issued Ext.P5 demand notice dated 18.9.2001 to the petitioner demanding payment of the sum of Rs.2,28,789/- being the licence fee and penalty payable for the period from 1996-1997 to 2001-2002. Reference was made to sections 231 and 231B of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Another notice dated 17.9.2001 was also issued calling upon the petitioner to show cause why he should not be prosecuted for running the plant without a licence. The petitioner responded to the said notices by sending Ext.P7 letter dated 27.9.2001 raising various contentions including the contention that section 231 referred to in Ext.P5 notice has no application and that section 231B is not in the statute. The Panchayat thereupon issued Ext.P8 proceedings dated 29.9.2001 withdrawing Ext.P5 notice and the notice dated 17.9.2001 on the ground that reference was made to wrong provisions of law. The Panchayat thereafter issued Ext.P9 notice dated 5.10.2001 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why proceedings should not be taken against the establishment for running the bottling plant without a licence. The petitioner in turn sent Ext.P10 letter dated 20.10.2001 contending that licence fee can be levied only for machinery having a total capacity of 432 HP and that fire pumps and diesel generating sets are not machinery used in the manufacturing process.
3. The Panchayat considered the said contention and thereafter issued Ext.P11 notice dated 30.10.2001 demanding payment of the sum of Rs.1,69,875/- being the arrears of licence fee payable for the period from 1996-97 to 2001-2002. Ext.P11 notice was issued on the basis that the capacity of the machinery installed in the bottling plant is 1865 HP, that the licence fee payable under rule 7 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996 based on the average daily turnover is Rs.4,000/-in terms of Schedule II of the said rules, that the licence fee payable in respect of the machinery used in the bottling plant, calculated in accordance with Schedule III thereof is Rs.18650/-and that the additional fee payable under rule 19 of the aforesaid rules for belated payment of licence fee and application for licence is 25% of the licence fee of Rs.22650/-, namely Rs.5,662.50. Ext.P11 discloses that the Panchayat had on that basis demanded from the petitioner the sum of Rs.28,312.50 per year during the period from 1996-97 to 2001-2002. The petitioner thereupon remitted the sum of Rs.15,560/-which according to the petitioner was the actual amount of fee and additional fee payable for the said period and submitted Ext.P12 application dated 7.11.2001 for renewal of the licence for the period from 199697 to 2001-2002. The Panchayat received the said payment and after giving credit to it issued Ext.P14 notice dated 26.11.2001 demanding payment of the balance amount of Rs.1,54,315/- so that Ext.Ext.P12 application can be considered. The petitioner was also cautioned that unless the licence is r
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.