SONA CHANDI OAL COMMITTEE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue involved in these petitions, is same and as such it is proposed to dispose of both the writ petitions by a common judgment.

(2.) IN both the writ petitions, there is a challenge to the validity of provisions of section 9-A of the Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946 (hereinafter called as "the said Act") as amended by Maharashtra Act No. 7 of 1992 which, according to the petitioners, is ultra vires with the provisions of the Constitution in so far as it seeks to levy inspection fee on the money lenders. Petitioners, therefore, seek striking down of section 9-A of the said Act. Consequently, the petitioners also sought quashing of the Deman Notice for payment of inspection fee.

(3.) WE may refer to some facts in Writ Petition No. 3469/93 which are more comprehensive. Petitioners therein are carrying money lending business and hold money lending licence issued under the provisions of the said Act. This petition gives history of incorporation of section 9-A and states that, for the first time, section 9-A in respect of levy of inspection fee was introduced by Bombay Act No. 50 of 1959 which came into force on 26-9-1959. The first amendment to section 9-A was made by Maharashtra Act No. 76 of 1975 which came into force from 26-7-1976. Ultimately, section 9-A was amended by Maharashtra Act No. 7 of 1992 which came into force from 28-4-1992. The amended provisions of section 9-A with which we are concerned in this petition are as under :