GREATER GUWAHATI UNITED MOTOR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION Vs. THE GAUHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for arbitrary, unauthorised and illegal realisation of entry tax from the vehicles belonging to the members of the Petitioner Association which are plied within the limits of the city of Guwahati.

(2.) A scheme for Mini City bus for unemployed youths were introduced by the State Government in the year 1988, Many educated unemployed youths purchased vehicles for plying as Mini City bus to make their livelihood. The Mini City bus owners of greater Guwahati formed an Association in the name and style of Greater Guwahati United Motor Transport Association, (GGUMTA) with its office at GS Road Guwahati - 7. All the members of the Association are permit holders. The Petitioners were duly authorised by the Association to take necessary steps before appropriate authorities including the court of law for redressal of their grievances. The Respondent No. 1 Guwahati Municipal Corporation is a body corporate Under Section 5(2) of Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act. According to the provision of the Act the, Commissioner is the Chief Executive and the corporation can be sued through him. The corporation is a local body entrusted with the duly of municipal administration of the pity of Guwahati and is a statutory body filed Under the Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act, 1969. Amongst, various right and duties entrusted to the Respondent No. 1 corporation Under Section 6 of the Act has also the right to levy and collect toll on vehicles and animals entering the city as provided Under Section 144(2)(c) of the Act and to facilitate such levy and collection of toll on the vehicles and animals entering the city of Guwahati, have framed a set of Bye Laws. "The Guwahati Municipal Corporation (Toll on vehicles and animals) Bye laws 1976." Under Bye law 4 of the Bye laws the Respondent corporation is empowered to collect toll on every animal and/or vehicles entering the city from outside at a rate as determined by the corporation. Under Bye law 9 (i) of the Bye laws, the Commissioner is competent to determine the number and location of check posts at different convenient and suitable parts of the city for levying and collecting such tolls. The members of the Petitioner Association plied their vehicles in various Mini City bus routes within the city of Guwahati, Amongest the various routes in which the Petitioner Association operates their vehicles, certain routes originate at different places like Adabari and other places, and alter passing through the Zoo Narengi route and Noonmati respectively terminates at Satgaon, viz, the Narengi Tinali. The termination point of the Mini City buses at Satgaouis within the jurisdiction of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation which falls within the Ward No. 31 of the Gauhati Municipal Corporation. In fact the city limits of the Gauhati city extends approximately 4/5 kms beyond the termination point at Satgaon to which the Mini City buses extend their service. These Mini City buses have to pay parking fee to the Respondent corporation for parking their vehicles at the termination point at Satgaon which shows that the termination point at Satgaon is within the jurisdiction of the Gauhati Municipal Corporation. Respondent corporation in order levy and collect the toll of vehicles and animals entering the city of Guwahati from outside have established a check gate at Narengi Tinali, Guwahati. The check gates, according to the Bye laws should be located at the point of entry to the city. But in this case the Noonmati Check gate has been established few kilometres inside the city of Guwahati. It is also alleged that as a consequence, certain vehicles like the Petitioner's vehicles, which are required to travel from one point to the another within the jurisdiction of the corporation and are required to pass through the check gate and also has to pay the toll for every entry into the city of Guwahati Petitioner's vehicles passes through the cheek gate at Narengi Tinali and terminates at Satgaon and they requires to pay the entry toll although such vehicles at no point of time go outside the limit of the city, nor enter the city like some other vehicles. During the course of the day almost 40 or more Mini City buses, belonging to the Petitioner, passes through the check gate at Narengi and each mini bus on each trip is required to pay Rs. 15/- (Presently as stated at the Bar enhanced to Rs. 15/- as entry toll at the check gate. One such Mini bus makes about six trips per day and kg such, 40 Mini buses make six trips and required to pay about Rs. 3,600/- per day. Under the law, it is contended inter alia, such vehicles which enter the city of Guwahati from outside are required to pay the entry toll. But due to arbitrary action of the Respondent corporation putting up the check gate at Narengi which is a few kilometres inside the limits of the Gauhati city, the vehicles of the Petitioner Association are required to pass through the Narengi Tinali check gate and have to pay the entry toll to the Respondent 'which actually ply within the limits of the Gauhati Municipal Corporation. Moreover, some of the receipt issued by the Respondent corporation against the payment of such entry toll did not show the vehicle number and the signature of the collecting authority and those are mere plain receipt form bearing the Book number and date (Annexure -II to the writ petition).

(3.) PETITIONER also challenged the rates of tax shown in the tender form and prays for a direction from this Court to the Respondent to install the Narengi Tinali check gate at a more appropriate location at the entry point of the city of Guwahati and shift the same from its present location at Narengi Tinali and also prays for quashing the notification dated 10.2.94 relating to submission and acceptance of tender, more particularly, to set aside the prescribed rates of tax. Though the Petitioner association raised the propriety of establishing the check gate far inside the limits of the city its main grievance is against proposed exorbitant enhancement of tolls for each trip from Rs. 5/- to Rs. 15/-. Further, the association alleges discrimination in fixing the toll to a Mini City bus which is not in conformity to other vehicles like a bus and a truck. Mr. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the Petitioner in course of his argument fairly submitted that he is not questioning the financial authority of the corporation to impose tolls but has impugned the legality of imposing tolls in an arbitrary manner putting the Petitioner association to pay more tolls in comparison to similarly situated other vehicles which amount to illegal enrichment on the part of the corporation.