KANSHI RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE has been thrown in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to the provision of Section 3-A of the Himachal pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972 and notification dated 23rd December, 1999 (Annexure PD), issued under sub-section (1)of Section 3-A of the Himachal Pradesh motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972, by the government of Himachal Pradesh. The aforesaid provision of Himachal Pradesh motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972 and the notification dated 23-12-1999 are sought to be declared as ultra vires and further prayer has been made for quashing and setting aside the order dated 5-7-2004 (Annexure pm), passed by Secretary, State Transport authority-cum-Appellate Authority, whereby the petitioner has been called upon to pay road tax at the rate prescribed for National Highway.

(2.) RELEVANT facts are like this. Petitioner is a permit holder for plying buses on two routes, i. e. , Mandi-Kumarde road and mandi-Dharampur road. When the permits were granted, both the routes were State roads. In the years 1998-99, portions of these two routes were declared National highway by the Government of India. Earlier petitioner was being charged tax under section 3-A of Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972 at the rates notified for State roads. After the road was declared National Highway by the Central Government, a demand was raised for payment of tax at the rates notified for National highways in respect of those portions of the routes which were declared National Highway. Petitioner filed appeal before State transport Authority-cum-Appellate Authority, challenging the demand raised by the regional Transport Authority. Appeal stands dismissed.

(3.) PETITIONER has filed the present writ petition, alleging that the States does not have the competence to enact law for levy of road tax in respect of National Highway and hence a demand made by the respondents for tax in respect of the portions of the routes declared as National Highway, is illegal and liable to be quashed. Another submission made by the learned counsel is that the tax is sought to be charged on the basis of total number of passenger seats in the buses, irrespective of the fact whether the seats are occupied or unoccupied and that levy of tax in respect of unoccupied seats is impermissible in view of the law laid down by the hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of hp and others v. Nurpur Private Bus Operators Union and others (1999) 9 SCC 559 : (AIR 1999 SC 3880 ).