Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, a company engaged in spinning and weaving textiles and its shareholder, challenged a resolution of the Standing Committee of the Brihan Mumbai Mahanagarpalika (BMC) dated 22nd February 1996, which revised water charges for certain industries, effectively doubling the rate. The petitioners contended that the resolution was unconstitutional and manifestly unreasonable. The court examined the powers of the Standing Committee under Section 169 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, which empowers the committee to make rules for the supply of water and determine charges. The court noted that the BMC had framed Water Charges Rules which were revised from time to time. The resolution in question was a revision of tariff based on consumption. The court held that the Standing Committee acted within its statutory powers and the revision was not arbitrary or unreasonable. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Water Charges - Revision of Tariff - Section 169, Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 - The Standing Committee has power under Section 169 to make rules for supply of water and determine charges, including revision of water charges based on consumption. The resolution doubling water charges for certain industries was held to be within the powers of the Standing Committee and not arbitrary or unreasonable. (Paras 2-3)
B) Constitutional Law - Reasonableness of Tax - Article 14 - The challenge to the water charges revision on grounds of unreasonableness and arbitrariness was rejected. The court held that the classification of industries and revision of charges was based on rational considerations and not violative of Article 14. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the resolution SCR No.1653 dated 22nd February 1996 passed by the Standing Committee of the BMC, doubling water charges for certain industries, is unconstitutional and manifestly unreasonable.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The resolution SCR No.1653 dated 22nd February 1996 is upheld as valid and within the powers of the Standing Committee.
Law Points
- Water charges revision
- Standing Committee powers
- Section 169 Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act
- 1888
- Reasonableness of tariff
- Industrial classification
- Water tax vs water charge
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (03) 38
Writ Petition No.840 of 1999
Ferdino I. Rebello, A.A. Sayed
Mr. Venkatesh R. Dhond i/b. Federal & Reshmikant for the Petitioners, Mrs. K. Kajale, AGP for Respondent State, Mr. A.Y. Sakhare, Senior Advocate with Mrs. Shobha Ajit Kumar for Respondent B.M.C.
The Morarjee Gokuldas Spinning & Weaving Company Limited and Mr. Pramod Kumar Gothi
State of Maharashtra and Brihan Mumbai Mahanagarpalika
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the constitutional validity and reasonableness of a resolution of the Standing Committee of the BMC revising water charges for certain industries.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought to have the resolution SCR No.1653 dated 22nd February 1996 declared unconstitutional and manifestly unreasonable.
Filing Reason
The petitioners challenged the doubling of water charges for certain industries by the Standing Committee of the BMC.
Issues
Whether the resolution SCR No.1653 dated 22nd February 1996 passed by the Standing Committee of the BMC is unconstitutional and manifestly unreasonable.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that the resolution doubling water charges was unconstitutional and manifestly unreasonable.
The respondents (BMC and State) defended the resolution as within the powers of the Standing Committee under Section 169 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.
Ratio Decidendi
The Standing Committee of the BMC has the power under Section 169 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 to make rules for the supply of water and determine charges, including revision of water charges based on consumption. The resolution doubling water charges for certain industries was not arbitrary or unreasonable and was within the statutory powers of the Standing Committee.
Judgment Excerpts
By the present petition the petitioners challenge as unconstitutional and manifestly unreasonable the resolution SCR No.1653 dated 22nd February 1996.
Section 169 confers power on the Standing Committee to make Rules for the supply of water and for charging for the supply of water...
Procedural History
The petition was filed in 1999 challenging a resolution dated 22nd February 1996. The matter was heard by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court and judgment was delivered on 19th March 2010.
Acts & Sections
- Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888: 140, 169, 398, 479
- Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954:
- Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966:
