(1.) IN this writ application, the petitioners have challenged the validity of that part of the notification dated 16th July, 1994 (Annexure 1) issued by the State Government with respect to the determination of road tax on the motor vehicles under the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1994 (hereinafter r6ferred to as 'the Bihar Taxation Act, 1994') whereby and whereunder educational institution has been classified as those recognised by the State Government or Central Government.
(2.) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the said specification of the educational institution in the impugned notification is inconsistent with sub -section (11) of Section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1988 Act') which contains the definition of "educational institution bus". According to it, "educational institution bus" means an omnibus, which is owned by a college, school or other educational institution and used solely for the purpose of transporting students or staff of the educational institution in connection with any of its activities whereas by the impugned notification the said definition has been confined with respect to only those recognised by the Stat~ Government or Central Government. Thus, according to the learned counsel, the impugned notification of the State Government issued in purported exercise of power under Section 15 of the Bihar Taxation Act, 1994 being in conflict with the Central Act is ultra vires Constitution of India, void and illegal.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Government Pleader No. IX appearing for the State has submitted that the taxes on vehicles, whether mechanically propelled or not, suitable for use on roads, including tramcars subject to the provision of Entry 35 of List III are in the State List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India under which the Bihar Taxation Act, 1994 has been enacted and Section 45 of the said Act vests power in the State Government to make an exemption, reduction in the rate or other modification in regard to the tax payable in respect of any motor vehicle or class of motor vehicles by issuing notification. It is submitted by him that Entry 35 of Concurrent List III of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution empowers both Parliament as well as the Legislature to make law relating to mechanically propelled vehicle, including the principles on which taxes on such vehicles are to by levied. Sub -section (11) of Section 2 of the 1988 Act defines the "educational institution bus", but the Parliament has not framed any law exempting the vehicle of the educational institution from taxation under Entry 35 of List III nor the principles on which taxes on such vehicles are to be levied. As such, according to the learned Government Pleader No. IX, there is no inconsistency in the impugned notification issued by the State Government with that of the provisions contained in the 1988 Act, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners.