Back
1996 Supreme(MP) 38
1997 (1) JLJ 402
A.K. Mathur, C.J. and S.C. Pandey, J.
Meera Khandelwal (Smt.) v. State of M.P. and others
W.P. No. 3161 of 1995; Decided on 9.1.1996.
N.S. Kale and N.C. Jain for petitioner; Anoop Choudhary,
Advocate General for respondents.
Headnote:(1) Municipalities Act, 1961 -- Ss.129(1), 126 and 127(1) (xvi) -- Constitution of India -- Arts. 19(1) (g), 301 and 304(b) -- provisions under S. 129 of the Act -- are valid even after amendment of 1995 -- municipality can validly impose export tax on goods and passengers -- imposition does not offend any of the Articles of the Constitution.
So far as the validity of section 129 of the Act 1961 vis-a-vis Art. 19(1) (g) and Art. 301 of the Constitution is concerned, that is without any basis. In order to augment the revenue of the Municipal Council, taxation is necessary. Municipal Councils are, as a matter of fact, constituted to provide necessary facilities to the area. They cannot survive on simple grants from the State. They have to explore their own sources for increasing their revenue so as to provide necessary municipal facilities to the residents of their area. Therefore, this was one of the sources available to the Municipal Councils as provided under sections 126 and 127 of the Act of 1961. This imposition of a small rate of tax was for public interest only which is saved under Art. 304(b) of the Constitution. AIR 1961 SC 232-, AIR 1962 SC 1406, AIR 1962 SC 1614 and 96 STC 53 discussed, 1987 MPLJ 643 relied on. [Para 8
(2) Municipalities Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- Ss.127(1) (xvi) and 129 -- main source of taxing event is S.127(1) (xvi) -- S.129 prescribes procedure -- amendment incorporated in S.129 is the result of 74th amendment of Constitution of India. [Para 9
(3) Natural Justice -- principles need not be followed in matter of impost by Legislature or by statutory body under statutory powers. AIR 1996 SC 1277 and AIR 1986 SC 1323 followed. [Para 10
(4) Constitution of India -- Arts. 243-X and 243 -- legislature making law authorising Municipalities to levy, recover taxes etc. -- may authorise the State Government to frame guidelines for the purpose -- it is not the delegation of legislative function. AIR 1990 SC 40, AIR 1992 SC 2038 and 1967 SC 1895 distinguished. [Para 12
(5) Municipalities Act, 1961 -- S.127(1) (xvi) -- imposition of export tax by municipality -- not violative of Arts. 14 or 301 of the Constitution. 1995(3) SCC 335 and 1995 Suppl. 1 SCC 673 followed. [Para 14
(6) Civil P.C. 1908 -- S.11 -- res judicata -- validity of some provision of law upheld -- the same cannot be challenged even on altogether other grounds -- principles of res judicata apply to the case. 1989(3) SCC 151 followed. [Para 16
(7) Constitution of India -- Art. 14 -- two classes apart altogether -- no question of discrimination arises. AIR 1983 SC 930, AIR 1981 SC 774, AIR 1981 SC 991 and 1961 JLJ 792 distinguished. [Para 17 & 18
¼1½ uxjikfydk vf/kfu;e] 1961 && /kkjk 129 ¼1½] rFkk 127 ¼1½ ¼lksyg½ && Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 19 ¼1½ ¼N½] 301 rFkk 304[k && vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 129 ds v/khu mica/k && 1995 ds la‘kks/ku ds i‘pkr~ Hkh fof/kekU; gSa && uxjikfydk }kjk eky rFkk ;kf=;ksa ij fu;kZr dj fof/kekU;r% vf/kjksfir fd;k tk ldrk gS && vf/kjksi.k ls lafo/kku ds fdlh vuqPNsn dk mYya?ku ugha gksrkA
tgk¡ rd lafo/kku ds vuq- 19 ¼1½ ¼N½ rFkk vuq- 301 ds eqdkcys esa 1961 ds vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 129 dh fof/kekU;rk dk laca/k gS] og fujk/kkj gSA uxjikfydk ifj"kn~ ds jktLo esa lao`f) djus ds fy, djk/kku vko‘;d gSA rF;kRed%] uxjikfydk ifj"knksa dk xBu {ks= esa vko‘;d lqfo/kk,¡ miyC/k djkus ds fy, fd;k tkrk gSA og ek= jkT; ls vuqnkuksa ij fVdh ugha jg ldrhaA viuk jktLo c<+kus ds fy, mUgsa vius lzksr [kkstuk iM+rs gSa rkfd vius {ks= ds fuokfl;ksa dks vko‘;d uxjikfyd lqfo/kk,¡ miyC/k dj ldsaA blfy,] 1961 ds vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 126 rFkk 127 esa ;Fkkmicaf/kr] uxjikfydk ifj"knksa dks miyC/k lzksrksa esa ls ,d FkkA dj dh FkksM+h&lh jsV dk ;g vf/kjksi.k yksd fgr ds fy, gh Fkk] tks lafo/kku ds vuq- 304 ¼[k½ ds v/khu O;ko`Ùk gSA , vkb vkj 1961 ,l lh 232] , vkb vkj 1962 ,l lh 1406] , vkb vkj 1962 ,l lh 1614 rFkk 96 ,l Vh lh 53 foosfprA 1987 ,e ih ,y ts 643 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 8
¼2½ uxjikfydk vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 127 ¼1½ ¼lksyg½ rFkk 129 && djk/kk;.k dk eq[; lzksr /kkjk 127 ¼1½ ¼lksyg½ gS && /kkjk 129 esa izfØ;k fofgr gS && /kkjk 129 esa lfEefyr la‘kks/ku Hkkjr ds lafo/kku ds 74osa la‘kks/ku dk ifj.kke gSA ¿ iSjk 9
¼3½ uSlfxZd U;k; && fo/kku&eaMy }kjk vFkok dkuwuh fudk; }kjk dkuwuh ‘kfDr;ksa ds v/khu ykxw djus ds fo"k; esa fl)karksa dk vuqlj.k vko‘;d ughaA , vkb vkj 1996 ,l lh 1277 rFkk , vkb vkj 1986 ,l lh 1323 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 10
¼4½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 243[k rFkk 243 && uxjikfydkvksa dks dj mn~x`ghr] olwy vkfn djus ds fy, izkf/kd`r djus dh fof/k fo/kku&eaMy }kjk fufeZr && bl mn~ns‘; ds fy, ekxZn‘kZd fl)kar fojfr djus ds fy, jkT; ljdkj dks izkf/kd`r dj ldrk gS && ;g fo/kk;h d`R;ksa dk izR;k;kstu ugha gSA , vkb vkj 1990 ,l lh 40] , vkb vkj 1992 ,l lh 2038 rFkk , vkb vkj 1967 ,l lh 1895 izHksfnrA ¿ iSjk 12
¼5½ uxjikfydk vf/kfu;e] 1961 && /kkjk 127 ¼1½ ¼lksyg½ && uxjikfydk }kjk fu;kZr dj dk vf/kjksi.k && lafo/kku ds vuq- 14 vFkok 301 dk mYya?ku ugha gksrkA 1995 ¼3½ ,l lh lh 335 rFkk 1995 lIyh- 1 ,l lh lh 673 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 14
¼6½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && /kkjk 11 && iwoZ U;k; && fof/k ds fdlh mica/k dh fof/kekU;rk ekU; BgjkbZ xbZ && iw.kZr% fHkUu vk/kkjksa ij Hkh ml ij vk{ksi ugha fd;k tk ldrk && ekeys esa iwoZ U;k; ds fl)kar ykxw gksrs gSaA 1989 ¼3½ ,l lh lh 151 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 16
¼7½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq- 14 && iw.kZr% vyx nks oxZ && foHksn dk iz‘u gh ugha mBrkA , vkb vkj 1983 ,l lh 930] , vkb vkj 1981 ,l lh 774] , vkb vkj 1981 ,l lh 991 rFkk 1961 ts ,y ts 792 izHksfnrA ¿ iSjk 17 rFkk 18
A.K. Mathur, C.J. -- 1. The order of the Court was delivered by A.K. Mathur, Ag. C.J. -- All these three writ petition Nos. 3161/95, 3469/95 and 2793/95 involve common question of law; therefore, they are disposed of by a common order. For convenient disposal of all these writ petitions, facts given in W.P. No. 3161 of 1995 are taken into consideration.
2. The petitioner has by this petition prayed that the provisions of Section 129 of the M.P. Municipalities Act 1961, as amended by the provisions of the M.P. Nagar Palik Vidhi (Sanshodhan) 1995 may be declared as ultra-vires. It is also prayed that imposition of export-tax by the respondent Municipality by resolution dated 20.7.1995 be declared invalid.
3. Petitioner Smt. Meera Khandelwal is the wife of Shri Vinod Khandelwal and proprietor of Khandelwal Industries, Industrial Ward, Dhamtari, District Raipur. The petitioner challenges by this petition the Constitutional validity of Section 129 as amended by Act No. 12 of 1995. It is submitted that there is no procedural safeguard in the exercise of powers for imposition of tax. It is also contended that the power has been conferred by the said proviso without inviting objection. It is further alleged that imposition of export tax violates Art. 301 of the Constitution of India and also violates the freedom of trade throughout the territories of India. The provision also suffers from the vice of excessive delegation as no maximum limit has been fixed for the imposition of export tax.
4. Before we deal with the arguments urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it would be relevant to quote here Section 129 of the Municipalities Act, 1961 which has been amended by the recent amendment Act No. 12/95, Section 129 as amended reads thus:
"Sec. 129
(1) The Council may, by a resolution, at the time of final adoption of the budget estimates for the next financial year, subject to the provisions of this Act and subject to such limitations and conditions, as may be prescribed by the State Government in this behalf:
(a) impose any of the taxes or fees specified in this Act; or
(b) increase the rates of taxes or fees already imposed.
(2) The resolution as referred to in sub-section (1) shall contain –
(a) in case of imposition of any tax or fee, the provisions under which such tax or fee is being imposed, class of persons or description of property to be taxed, the amount or rate of tax or fee being imposed, system of assessment and collection to be adopted and the date from which imposition of such tax or fee shall take effect;
(b) In case of increase of rate of any tax or fee, the prevailing rate of such tax or fee, the proposed increased rate of such tax or fee and the date from which increase of rate or such tax or fee shall take effect.
(3) The resolution, as passed shall be conclusive evidence of the imposition of a new tax or fee, or increase or rate of any tax or fee, as the case may be :
Provided that if the Council decides to have supplementary taxation during the financial year, it may do so from such date as the council may resolve, subject to the provisions of this Act and subject to such limitations and conditions, as may be prescribed by the State Government in this behalf.
(4) Nothing contained in this section shall apply to tax mentioned in clause (i) of sub-section (1) of Section 127 which shall be charged and levied in accordance with Section 127-A".
By this amendment Act, various other provisions of the Municipalities Act were amended; but, at present, we are concerned with the constitutional validity of Section 129 of the Act only. This amendment has been brought about in order to confer wide powers to the local bodies and remove some of the anomalies in the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961, as pointed out by the State Election Commission. Rest of the amendments have been proposed as a measure of consequential nature. With this statement of object, the Act was amended. Section 127
