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

2024 Supreme(HP) 106

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, SATYEN VAIDYA, JJ.
N.H.P.C. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. & ors. - Respondents
CWP No. 2916 of 2023 a/w CWP Nos. 2262, 2263, 2277, 2600, 2721, 2739, 2855, 2864, 2869, 2913, 2917, 2918, 3083 to 3087, 3107, 3114 to 3117, 3129, 3130, 3246, 3247, 3249, 3260, 3300, 3410, 3897, 3898, 4105, 4111, 4163, 4239, 5410 and 7295 of 2023.
Decided on : 05-03-2024

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Tushar Mehta, Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora and Mr. Avneesh Arputtham, Advocates, Ms. Shalini Thakur and Dr. Seema Jain, Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Rajnish Maniktala, Mr. Naresh Kumar Verma, Mr. Vikas Chauhan, Mr. Vishwajeet Tyagi, Mr. Tarun Johri and Mr. Sarthak Mehta, Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sameer Thakur, Ms. Sneh Bhimta and Mr. Adarsh Tripathi, Advocates, Mr. N.K. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aman Sood, Advocate, Ms. Vandana Gupta, Sr. Law Officer and Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mr. R.L. Sood, Mr. H.S. Chandoke, Mr. Anant Garg and Mr. Janesh Gupta, Mr. Sujit Ghosh, Mr. Nishant Kumar, Mr. Virender Sharma, Ms. Anshika Agarwal, Ms. Mannat Waraich, Mr. Tushar Mehta, Ms. Shradha Karol, Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan and Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocates, Mr. Anand Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate Mr. Ankur Sehgal and Janesh Gupta, Advocates
For the Respondents:Mr. Dushyant Dave, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. I.N. Mehta and Mr. Yashwardhan Chauhan, Senior Additional Advocate Generals, Mr. Navlesh Verma, and Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. J.S. Guleria, Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General ofIndia and Mr. Rajinder Thakur, Mr. Anand Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Sunita Sharma, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Lalita Sharma, Mr. Nitin Thakur, M/s Satish Mukherjee, Abhishek Kumar, Nived, Shubham Mudgil and Mr. Janesh Gupta, Mr. Shivom Vashishta, Advocate

The imposition of a cess under the Himachal Pradesh Water Cess on Hydropower Generation Act, 2023 is unconstitutional as it effectively levies a tax on electricity generation, violating the legislative competence of the State under the Constitution.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 245, 246, 265, 288, and 300A - Himachal Pradesh Water Cess on Hydropower Generation Act, 2023 - Legislative competence - Petitioners challenge the Act as unconstitutional on grounds of legislative competence under the State List, asserting the State lacks power to levy a cess on water usage for hydroelectric projects. The State contends the tax aligns with Entries 17 and 18 of the State List. The Court finds that the Act, in substance, imposes a tax on the generation of electricity disguised as a water cess, making it ultra vires the Constitution. Sections 10 and 15 of the Act declared unconstitutional and quashed. (Paras 1-93)

(B) Excessive delegation of legislative authority - The Act fails to provide adequate guidelines for fixing the rate of cess, amounting to an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power. (Paras 83-91)

Facts of the case:
Power generation companies challenged the Himachal Pradesh Water Cess on Hydropower Generation Act, arguing it oversteps the State's legislative competence regarding taxation of inter-State river water usage for electricity generation.

Findings of Court:
The Court ruled that the Act is an improper taxation measure levied on electricity generation and not on water per se, thus unconstitutional.

Issues: The main issues were the State's competence to levy tax under Entries 17, 18, and whether the Act imposed a tax on water or electricity generation.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the importance of 'pith and substance' in legal analysis, determining that the true nature of the enactment was a tax on electricity generation, thus exceeding the legislative authority of the State.

Result: The petitions allowed, the Act was struck down as unconstitutional.

Table of Content
1. the legal context and implications surrounding the himachal pradesh water cess act for hydropower generation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments for and against the legislative competence of the state to impose cess on hydropower generation. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT :

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, J.

Since, somewhat identical issues of fact and law are involved in these batch of writ petitions, therefore, they have been decided by this common judgment.

Case of the Petitioner(s):

1.1. The petitioners are power generation companies engaged in the production of the electricity by using river water. They own, operate and maintain the hydropower projects. The petitioners after entering into agreements with the Government of Himachal Pradesh are running the projects. The petitioners seek to assail the legislative competence, the constitutional validity and the vires of the Himachal Pradesh Water Cess on Hydropower Generation Act , 2023 (hereinafter to be referred to as the “Act”), inter alia, on the following grounds:

    (i) The State lacks legislative competence/power as per Article 265 of the Constitution of India.

    (ii) The legislative powers of the Union Government or the State Government have been so demarcated and specified by way of Seventh Schedule under List-I known as Union List, List-II known as State List, List-III known as Concurrent List. Thus, the State Government has legislative powers under Article 265 of Constitution of India to levy any cess only if the same finds mention in List-II. However, none of entries under List-II or the State List empowers the State Government to levy cess/tax on water usage for the purpose of generation of electricity, as has been done by the State Government.

    (iii) Entry 53 of List-II empowers the State Government to levy tax/cess in respect of electricity, however, that entry is not applicable and does not empower the State Government to levy cess on water usage for the purpose of generation of hydro electricity.

    (iv) The State cannot take recourse to entry No.17 of list-II for defending its impugned Act as the same firstly does not empower the State Govt. to levy a tax or cess on water and secondly, even for the sake of arguments, if entry No. 17 of List Il so empowers the State Government, the impugned Act cannot become operative in view of the non-compliance of the provisions of Article 288 of Constitution of India.

    (v) The State Government by way of provisions of the Act has vested with itself non-consumptive usage of water of inter-state rivers, which amounts to encroaching upon the legislative powers of the Union Government, as under List-I of the Seventh Schedule by way of entry No.56, it is only the Union Government, which has the legislative powers with respect to interstate rivers and river valleys.

    (vi) The Hydroelectric Power Projects of the petitioners are Central Sector Hydroelectric Power Projects built over inter-state rivers, namely, Ravi and Beas and its tributaries, with the sanction of the Union Government and, therefore, any restriction imposed by the State Government in the usage of water flowing from the said rivers by way of seeking sanction for non consumptive usage of river water and further by way of levy of cess on such non-consumptive use of inter-state river water for generation of electricity, is wholly illegal and invalid being beyond the legislative competence/power of the State Government.

    (vii) The Govt. of India, Ministry of Power taking note of the fact that some of the States have imposed taxes/duties on generation of electricity in the guise of water tax/cess, vide letter dated 25.04.2023 had called upon all the Chief Secretaries of the State Governments and Union Territories not to levy such tax/duty/cess being contrary to the constitutional provisions and the same be promptly withdrawn.

    (viii) Section 10 of the Act and Rule 7 of Himachal Pradesh Water Cess from Hydro Power Generation Rules , 2023 (for short “the Rules”) have impact of taking away the

                  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
                  logo-black

                  An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                  Please visit our Training & Support
                  Center or Contact Us for assistance

                  qr

                  Scan Me!

                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                  whatsapp-icon Back to top