(1.) The petitioners in these five writ petitions challenge the levy of octroi duty on cinematography films brought by them for exhibition in cinema halls. The petitioners are owners of cinema halls situated in different towns in the State. They bring cinematography films from different distributors for exhibition in the cinema halls. The Municipal Council within the limits of which the cinema halls are located have imposed octroi duty on the films brought by the petitioners and owners of other cinema halls situated therein, at different rates. The Municipal Councils concerned in these writ petitions are those of Balasore and Berhampur. The imposition has been made in exercise of power under S.131(1)(kk) of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), after getting the requisite sanction from the State Government in the Housing and Urban Development Department as required under the Act. Since the material facts in all these writ petitions are not in dispute and the petitioners raise common questions of law the cases were heard together and shall be disposed of by this common order.
(2.) The gist of the case made out by the petitioners in their writ applications, is that they get films from different distributors for exhibition in their cinema halls from time to time. Each film consists of several reels depending on length. In most of the cases the films that the petitioners get are old copies which have already been exhibited in cinema halls elsewhere in the country. According to the petitioners, under the agreement with the distributors the title in the goods (films) remains with the distributors and the petitioners pay either a certain percentage of the collection or a fixed amount as rental to the distributors for exhibition of the films in their cinema halls. On expiry of the period fixed under the agreement, the film is returned to the distributor without any change in its original form. On these facts, the petitioners contend that the provisions of S.131(1)(kk) of the Orissa Municipal Act are not attracted since the films are not brought inside the Municipal limits for 'sale' or 'consumption' or 'use'. As such, the action of the Municipal Council levying octroi duty on the films and that of the State Government according sanction for such levy are ultra vires the aforesaid provision of the statute and invalid and inoperative. The imposition and collection of octroi duty on the basis of such illegal action is also bad.
(3.) The opposite parties, i.e., the Municipal Councils concerned and the State Government in the Urban Land Development Department in their counter-affidavit have not contested the averments on facts in the foregoing para. They however, contend that under the arrangement between the distributors and the petitioners (exhibitors), though the latter might (not) have brought the films inside the municipal limits for sale or consumption, they have brought the said films for 'use'. As such, it is urged on behalf of the opposite parties that the condition precedent for imposition of octroi duty is satisfied and the petitioners are liable to pay the impost.