The delegation of power to a local authority to levy taxes is not excessive if the legislature has provided sufficient guidelines and safeguards to ensure that the taxes are levied reasonably.

( 1 ) BY these petitions the petitioners have prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorori quashing Notification No. 1935/ix 2-122-79 dated March, 11. 1981, issued by the state Government levying water tax and sewerage tax at 12$ per cent and 3 per cent respectively and the bills issued to the petitioners on the aforesaid basis. The petitioners have also prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining respondent No. 1 from realising the taxes at the aforesaid rates. They have also prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Nagar Mahapalika to reduce the general tax to the extent to make the total taxes i. e. general tax, water tax and sewerage tax to 25 per cent of the annual letting value and respondent No. 1 to reduce the rate of excess water supply.

( 2 ) FOR the sake of convenience writ petition No. 817 of 1981 is treated as the leading case. In this petition petitioner No. 1 is a registered society whose main function is to look after the interest of the citizens of Kanpur particularly their civic amenities and rights. Petitioners Nos. 2 to 9 are landlords and owners of the houses situate in different localities of Kanpur.

( 3 ) PRIOR to the enactment of the Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975, (U. P. Act no. 43 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), under which Jal Sansthans have been constituted, property tax which included a general tax, water tax and drainage tax was levied under Section 173 of the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam. The general tax was levied at the rate of 17 1/4 per cent, water tax at 6 1/4 per cent and drainage tax at 1 1/2 per cent of the annual value of the building or land or both. Under the Act amongst the functions entrusted to a Jal Sansthan are : (i) to plan, promote and execute schemes of and operate an efficient system of water supply; and (ii) to plan, promote and execute schemes of, and operate, sewerage, sewage treatment and disposal and treatment of trade effluents. under Section 52 of the Act a Jal Sansthan is empowered to levy water tax and sewerage tax. Under the impugned notification issued by the state Government water tax has been levied at 12 1/2 per cent and sewerage tax at 3 per cent. Respondent No. 1 has also revised the tariff for excess water supply. Bills have been submitted to the petitioners at the revised rates.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contended that Section 52 of the Act which empowered a jal Sansthan to levy water tax and sewerage tax, was ultra vires on the ground of legislative competence. It was urged that no tax can be levied or collected except by authority of law as provided by Article 265 of the Constitution and since the taxes in question do not fall within the legislative field of any of the items in List II of the Seventh Schedule, they are invalid. According to the learned counsel Entry No. 17, which is the only head under which the State legislature is competent to legislate on the subject of water supply etc. , is not an entry relating to tax and under the residuary Entry 66 only fee can be levied and no tax. This argument ignores entry 49 which empowers the State legislature to impose taxes on lands and buildings. The subject matter of water tax is not water under Section 52 of the Act water tax as also sewerage tax is levied on the assessed annual value of the premises. It is in reality a tax on land and buildings though called water tax. This matter came up for consideration before this Court in raza Buland Sugar Co. Ltd. v. Municipal Board, Rampur (AIR 1962 All 83 ). Dealing with section 128 (1) (x) of the U. P. Municipalities Act, which empowers a municipality to impose a water tax on the annual value of buildings or lands or of both, a Bench of this Court held that water tax is in substance a tax on lands and buildings. The same reasoning applies to sewerage tax. The case was taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court (Ra