Case: Bus Parichalana Samity Vs State of Assam and Ors.. Guwahati High Court
| Judges | I.A. Ansari, J. |
| Issue | Municipal Tax |
| Citation | 2007 (1) GLR 342, 2006 (4) GLT 394 |
| Judgement Date | May 08, 2006 |
| Court | Guwahati High Court |
Judgment:
I.A. Ansari, J.
1. Both these writ petitions involve substantially the same parties, almost identical facts and these two writ petitions have been heard, on the request of the learned Counsel for the parties, together and are, therefore, disposed of by this common judgment and order.
Case of the petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 1653/2003 and 4889/2004
2. The petitioner, namely, Bus Parichalana Samiti is an association of the bus owners of the various districts in Assam, including the district of Barpeta. The petitioner is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act. The members of the petitioner-Association ply their buses throughout the district of Barpeta and beyond and while so plying their buses, the members of the petitioner-Association are required to take their vehicles through the area of Barpeta Road Municipal Board. The members of the petitioner-Association have been plying their buses since the days of independence and much before Barpeta Town Committee was established, in the year 1961, under the provision of Assam Municipal Act, 1956. Barpeta Road Municipal Board (in short, 'the respondent-Board') replaced Barpeta Town Committee in the year 1976. The respondent-Board has started collection of parking fees from the buses of the members of the petitioner-Association on various rates and a notice inviting tender has already been issued by the respondent-Board, on 10.01.2003, for settlement of six parking gates for the financial year 2003-04 for collection of parking fees. Since the respondent-Board has no authority to collect parking fees, the issuance of notice inviting tender for collection of parking fees is without jurisdiction and the respondent-Board needs to be stopped from levying or collecting any parking fees or from appointing any lessee for collection of parking fees.
3. While issuing notice of motion, on 7.3.2003, in WP(C) No. 1653/2003, the court stayed, until further order, levy or collection of parking fees from the buses within the municipal area of Barpeta Road and the respondents were directed not to collect any parking fees without leave of the court. In course of time, as the petitioner did not pursue the writ petition, the writ petition was dismissed, on 26.3.2004, for default. This writ petition was, however, restored to file on 8.4.2004 and the interim order, dated 7.3.2003, was directed to continue.
4. Pending disposal of WP(C) No. 1653/2003, the petitioner-Association filed yet another writ petition, which came to be registered as WP(C) No. 4889/2004, the case of the writ petitioner, in WP(C) No. 4889/2004, being, in brief, thus: There is a bus terminus situated in Barpeta Road town area, located at PWD road. The members of the petitioner-Association have been using the said place as a parking place for the purpose of picking up passengers and also to enable the passengers to alight from the buses. For the maintenance of this bus terminus, the respondent-Board has not spent anything; rather, the said bus terminus has always been maintained by the PWD with the contributions made by the members of the petitioner-Association. By a notice, dated 25.5.2004, the respondent-Board has imposed varied sums of money as parking fees on buses, trucks, taxis, tractors, etc. The bus, truck and mini bus do not fall within the definition of the term 'carriage' as defined in Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956. This apart, the levy of parking fees on bus, truck and mini bus is not permissible, for, under Section 68(1)(g) of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, the Municipal Board is empowered to collect licence fees from cart, carriage and animals other than motor vehicles as defined in the Assam Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1936. As the vehicles of the petitioner-Association fall within the ambit of the Assam Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1936, these vehicles are not amenable to the levy of parking fees by the respondent-Board. This apart, levy of such a parking fees need sanction of the Government under Clause (n) of Sub-section (1) of Section 68. The respondent-Board has sought to impose parking fees in purported exercise of its powers under Section 148 of the said Act, though Section 148 is attracted only when a parking place is established or when any improvement of such a parking place is sought to be made. In the case at hand, the bus stand has been in existence for long and, hence, the question of establishing the bus stand does not arise and since no improvement is sought to be made to any existing bus stand, the question of imposing parking fees for improvement of the bus stand does not arise. Above all, since the parking place is not on the land of the respondent-Board, the respondent-Board has no authority to collect parking fees. Though the respondent-Board has imposed parking fees describing the parking place as a bus stand, the vehicles from which parking fees are sought to be realized are not only buses, but also trucks, taxis, etc. No such exercise of powers is permissible by the respondent-Board. The petitioner-Association, therefore, seek to get set aside and quashed the impugned notice, dated 25.5.2004, aforementioned.
Case of the respondents
5. The notice, dated 25.5.2004, which is the subject-matter of challenge in the writ petitions, has been issued by the chairman of the respondent-Board in pursuance of the resolution adopted, in this regard, by the respondent-Board in its meeting held, on 17.5.2004, deciding to collect parking fees from the buses, trucks, tractors, taxis, mini buses, mini trucks, tempo, auto-rickshaws, etc., the parking fees being different for different kinds of vehicles. Section 148 of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, as the same stands amended since the year 1994, empowers the respondent-Municipal Board to collect parking fees from trucks, taxis, auto-rickshaws, etc., for parking the vehicles on the land provided by the Municipal Board. Under the provisions of Section 148, the respondent-Board is entitled to collect parking fees from the vehicles even if the land used for parking place is a private land. Neither for imposing the parking fees nor for fixing the rates of the parking fees, the respondent-Board is required to take prior approval or sanction from the State Government. Section 68(1)(g), which the petitioner-Association rely upon, is inapplicable to the facts of the present case inasmuch as Section 68(1)(g) relates to imposition of license fees, whereas the present case relates to the collection of parking fees, Section 68(1)(g) cannot, thus, bar the respondent-Board's power, under Section 148, to levy parking fees. While imposition of licence fees on cart, carriage and animals used for riding or burden is provided under Section 117 of the said Act, the power to impose parking fees is contained in Section 148 of the said Act. Since the respondent-Board has the power to collect parking fees for providing space as a parking place, there is no impediment, on the part of the respondent-Board, to collect parking fees at such rates as deemed fit by it from any such vehicle, which may be parked at such a parking place. The writ petition has no merit and the same may, therefore, be dismissed with costs.
6. Though the writ petitioners have challenged the levy of parking fees on different grounds, all these grounds may, in substance, be summarized as follows:
(i) A Municipal Board, constituted under the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, is not empowered to collect any fee from any motor vehicle except licence fee in respect of cart, carriage and animal. Parking fees cannot be imposed on motor vehicles by any Municipal Board, for, a Municipal Board is, under Section 68(1)(g) of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956, empowered to impose only licence fees on cart, carriage and animal used for riding and burden. The word 'carriage", occurring in Sub-section (3) of Section 3, does not cover motor vehicles, such as, buses and, hence, the buses of the members of the petitioner-Association are not amenable to levy of...
To continue reading
Request your trial