JANHIT MANCH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Public Interest Litigation ( PIL for short) is filed basically to seek appropriate orders for octroi evasion by vehicle owners in the city of Mumbai.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioners is that pursuant to an article in a Daily Newspaper captioned as "Mumbai struggles to find parking space" the petitioners made enquiries which revealed that during the year 2006-2007, 37182 vehicles were registered in Mumbai and during the same period 90,257 vehicles were registered at Thane. By comparing the population of Mumbai with the population of Thane, the petitioners contend that during the period of 2006-2007, substantial number of vehicles registered at Thane must have been purchased by the residents of Mumbai and the same were registered at Thane with a view to evade the octroi duty. It is the contention of the petitioners that several vehicles registered outside the State of Maharashtra are also regularly used in the City of Mumbai or within Maharashtra thereby causing enormous loss of octroi duty. The petitioners, therefore, seek an order for launching a State wide campaign by setting up special squads for detecting the vehicles registered in the State other than Maharashtra but are continuously used in the City or other parts of the State.

(3.) On behalf of the respondents, it is contended that the respondents are regularly checking the registration certificates of the vehicles found to be registered outside Mumbai. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the circular dated 29/01/2007 issued by the Transport Commissioner, requiring documents to be filed at the time of registration of vehicles are strictly implemented in the State. It is stated that the documents which are specified in the Central Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules framed thereunder are insisted and accepted as proof of residence or proof of business or office address for registering the vehicles in the name of the owner / buyer.