P K BALAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants aggrieved by the common order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.6.2001 passed in W.P. Nos. 19336 -45 and 19346 -56/2001 have filed the respective writ appeals.

(2.) IT is stated that the appellants are Tourist Operators recognised by the Department of Tourism and they are the owners of certain vehicles which they are plying in the respective States of Kerala and Goa. It is stated that the State Government in exercise of its power under Section 16(1)(a) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 ('Act' for short) issued a notification dated 31.3.1994 in respect of the motor vehicles of other States covered by permit granted under the Scheme of All India Permit for Tourist Transport Operators Rules, 1993 (in short 'Rules') directing that to ply the motor vehicles specified therein the owners of the motor vehicles will have to pay tax by way of composite amount per quarter, as mentioned therein, with effect from 1.4.1994. It is stated that the appellants are plying their motor vehicles under the All India permit in the State of Karnataka by paying the composite amount. It is stated that by another notification dated 31.3.2001, the State Government rescinded the earlier notification dated 31.3.1994. Deprived of the benefit of the concessional rates, the appellants filed the aforesaid writ petitions challenging the notification dated 31.3.2001 (Annexure -F) and the same were dismissed. Against that dismissal, the present writ appeals are filed.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 submits that once the Government has exercised its power and rescinded the notification, the appellants cannot contend that they are entitled to benefit under Section 16A of the Act all the time. He submits that the appellants cannot agitate this point, as they had not raised the same before the learned Single Judge. He submits that the learned Single Judge has considered the arguments and various case -laws and also the competence of the Government to exercise its power under Section 16(1) of the Act and as such the appellants cannot say that the decision of Andhra Pradesh High Court is not applicable. The decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, wherein the constitutional validity of the Notification in G.O.Ms. No. 83 (Transport -II) Dept. dated 5.2.2000, cancelling the concessional rates provided by the earlier order, was challenged and the same was upheld, was approved by the Supreme Court, and therefore, the order of the learned Single Judge needs no interference.