Back
S. MURALIDHAR, B. P. ROUTRAY
Pravabati Mohanty – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S. Muralidhar, J
1. This writ petition filed on 15th April, 2005 by a resident of Cuttack City alleges that water charges levied and collected from the inhabitants of Cuttack City are illegal and exorbitant. The Petitioner seeks the quashing of a resolution dated 1st December, 1980 of the Housing and Urban Development Department (H & UD Department), Government of Odisha by which the "Orissa Waters Works (Urban Local Bodies) Rules, 1980 (hereafter ‘the 1980 Rules’) were notified. The challenge is also to the resolution dated 16th August, 1996 of the H & UD Department amending the 1980 Rules thereby revising the drinking water tariff provided thereunder. A corrigendum dated 28th August, 1996 to the said rules providing for an automatic increase of the water tariff @ 10% every year and for revision every five years of the structure of the tariff and for the annual rate of increase has also been challenged.
2. The fourth document to be challenged is a communication dated 3rd August, 2001 from the Executive Engineer (PH) Division clarifying to the Sub-Divisional Officer, that the water tariff will continue to be automatically increased @ 10% every year with effect from 20th Augu
Increase in water supply charges - Executive function includes “initiation of legislation, maintenance of the order and carrying on supervision, General Administration of to the State.
Water cess can only be imposed when water is drawn from irrigation works as defined by the Bihar Irrigation Act, 1997, and requires a prior notification to classify a part of a river as such; failure....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the unfairness of demanding arrears of water charges based on a resolution not acted upon, considering the executed contract and concluded transact....
The court emphasized the importance of fairness and adherence to the principles of natural justice in contractual disputes, and held that it would be unfair to demand arrears of charges based on a re....
Unfairness of demanding arrears based on retrospective reassessment of water charges when a concluded contract and benefit passed on to consumers.
The court emphasized the principle of fairness in contractual agreements and the importance of upholding executed contracts.
The imposition of water tax by the Municipal Board was legitimate under statutory authority and did not violate constitutional rights.
Imposition of royalty on captive power generation without legislative authority violates constitutional provisions and is discriminatory, particularly when no prior contractual agreement exists for s....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
