BIRLA CEMENT WORKS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this group of special appeals and writ petitions the common question of law arises whether dumpers though used only within the enclosed factory premises fall within the exempted category and are 'motor vehicle' being adaptable and kept for use on roads even though actually used within the enclosed premises of petitioner factory or the mines area, are liable to pay tax under Section 4 and 4-B of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1951?

(2.) The contention of the petitioners/appellants is that the dumpers are essentially earth moving equipment not adapted for use upon the roads and, therefore, are outside the ambit of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1951. On the other hand the case of the Department is that the dumpers are vehicles adapted or suitable for use on roads and being 'motor vehicle' per se and same liable to pay the tax on the footing of their use or kept for use on public roads. In our view the controversy is settled by the decision of the Apex Court in M/s. Central Coal Fields Ltd. v. State of Orissa, 1992 Supp (3) SCC 133 : (AIR 1992 SC 1371), Union of India v. Chowgule and Co. Pvt. Ltd., 1992 Supp (3) SCC 141 and Chief General Manager, Jagannath Area v. State of Orissa, (1996) 10 SCC 676 and a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Rashid Mohd. v. State, reported in AIR 1994 Raj 167 Para 24. It is held that dumpers run on tyres, in marked contrast to chain plates like caterpillars or military tanks and as such have been adapted and suitable for use on roads irrespective of its weight and special restriction and being used in an enclosed factory premises. A 'motor vehicle' per se being suitable for use on roads is liable to taxation on the footing of their use or kept for use on public roads, the network of which, the State spreads, maintains it and keeps available for use of motor vehicles and hence is entitled to a regulatory and compensatory tax. Thus, the special appeals and the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed.

(3.) After answering the question posed, as objective type, we proceed to deal with the matter in traditional way. In the instant bunch, three special appeals are filed by M/s. Birla Cement Works against the judgment of the learned single Judge relegating the petitioners to the statutory remedy of revision under the Act of 1951. Similar two special appeals by M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd. are also filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge relegating the petitioner to the statutory alternate remedy. There are two writ petitions filed by Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Both the petitions pending before the learned single Judge were directed to be heard along with the instant special appeals by order dated 13-3-2003. The relevant facts of the special appeals and writ petitions are set out as followed :- M/S. BIRLA CEMENT WORKS :