Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Rushabh Outdoors (a partnership firm) and Vandana Borse (proprietress of M/s. Synnovation), challenged the constitutional validity of sub-section (2) of Section 479 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act). They also challenged Resolution No.999 passed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai on 11th December 2009, which revised the schedule of fees for advertisement licenses issued under Sections 328 and 328A of the MMC Act, increasing fees by 80% for the first year and 10% per annum thereafter. The petitioners argued that Section 479(2) delegates unguided and arbitrary power to the Commissioner to fix license fees, violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The respondents, the State of Maharashtra and the Municipal Corporation, defended the provision, contending that the legislature had provided sufficient guidelines and that the fee revision was reasonable and based on expert recommendations. The court analyzed the scheme of the MMC Act, noting that Section 479(2) requires the Commissioner to fix fees with the approval of the Corporation, and that the Act provides for factors such as the nature of the advertisement and the area. The court held that the delegation is not excessive as the legislature has laid down the policy and guidelines. The court also found that the fee revision was not arbitrary or discriminatory and was a reasonable restriction on the right to carry on business. The writ petition was dismissed, upholding the constitutional validity of Section 479(2) and the impugned resolution.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Delegated Legislation - Excessive Delegation - Section 479(2) of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 - Challenge to the power of the Commissioner to fix license fees for advertisements - The court held that the legislature has laid down sufficient guidelines in the Act, including the requirement of approval by the Corporation, and the power is not unguided or arbitrary - Held that Section 479(2) does not suffer from excessive delegation (Paras 10-25). B) Constitutional Law - Article 14 - Reasonable Classification - License Fee Revision - The court held that the revision of fees by Resolution No.999 dated 11th December 2009, which increased fees by 80% initially and 10% annually, is based on a reasonable classification and does not violate Article 14 - Held that the fee structure is not discriminatory (Paras 26-30). C) Constitutional Law - Article 19(1)(g) - Reasonable Restriction - License Fee for Business - The court held that the imposition of license fees is a reasonable restriction in the interest of the general public and regulation of trade - Held that Section 479(2) does not violate Article 19(1)(g) (Paras 31-35).
Issue of Consideration
Whether sub-section (2) of Section 479 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 is unconstitutional on the ground of excessive delegation and violation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. Section 479(2) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 is held to be constitutionally valid. Resolution No.999 dated 11th December 2009 is upheld.
Law Points
- Constitutional validity of delegated legislation
- License fee fixation by municipal corporation
- Doctrine of excessive delegation
- Reasonable classification under Article 14
- Reasonable restriction under Article 19(1)(g)
- Power of Commissioner to fix fees under Section 479(2) of MMC Act
