SUBHASH CHANDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions Nos. 3619 of 1985 and 979 of 1986 challange the Haryana Municipal (Cow-Houses) Bye-Laws 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Bye-laws') as also the imposition of the fee. The questions of fact and law being identical, these petitions shall be disposed of by a common order.

(2.) IT would suffice to notice the facts in CWP No. 3619 of 1985. The 169 petitioners are residents of Sonepat. Each one of them owns 3 to 35 cows or buffalows and are engaged in the business of 'dairy'. They claim to have been engaged in this business for the last many years. It is the case of the petitioners that the Municipal Committee, Sonepat (hereinafter referred to as 'the Committee') does not provide any facility by way of grazing grounds, a pond, or any other facility which may be of any use to the petitioners. On the contrary, the petitioners claim that their business is a source of revenue of the Committee in as much as the carcasses are sold by the Committee, as a result of which it earns about Rs. 80,000/- to Rs. 1,00,000/ - per year.

(3.) THE State of Haryana u/s. 200 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') framed the bye-laws providing interalia that no person living within the municipal limit shall use any premises as a cow-house without obtaining a licence. It was also prescribed that for each cow-house a separate licence will be necessary. A licence fee of Rs. 10/- per animal above one year of age and Rs. 5/- per animal up to one year of age was prescribed. The petitioners having failed to obtain licence and to pay the necessary fee were served with a notice alleging infringement of the bye-laws. They were called upon to explain their conduct. They were also informed that on that failure to comply with the notice legal proceedings were likely to be initiated against them. Aggrieved by the issue of the notices, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the bye-laws through the present writ petition.