Punchhi, J. - (1.) These four appeals by special leave are against the common judgment and order dated 3-4-1978 of the Judicial Commissioner of Goa, Daman and Diu in Special Civil Applications (Writ Petitions) Nos. 2/ 69, 12/ 69, 47 / 70 and 48 / 70. The Union of India and its officers are the common appellants herein.
(2.) Shortly put, the four writ petitioners before the Judicial Commissioner, the respondents herein, were carrying on mining operations in certain areas in the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu. Thereat they had been using various types of mining machinery including dumpers and shovels. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act') was made applicable in the Union Territory w.e.f. 1-1-1965 and simultaneously the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1965 (hereafter referred to as the 'Taxation Act') was also enforced on that date. The respondents claimed that being under a mistaken belief that their dumpers and shovels were 'motor vehicles' and hence liable to tax under the Taxation Act, they initially got those registered under the Act and paid tax thereon under the Taxation Act. Later when they realised that they had paid tax under a mistaken belief, they stopped paying tax, whereupon the appellants-officers herein issued orders and notices requiring the respondents to pay the taxes. Challenging the concerned orders and notices the respondents moved the Court of the Judicial Commissioner requiring the said orders and notices to be struck down as violative of their fundamental rights guaranteed by Art. 31(i.) of the Constitution, for the petitioners were to be deprived of their property without auithority of law, and also being violative of the provisions of Art. 265 and Entry 57 of List 11 of the Constitution. On facts it was pleaded that dumpers and slovels were not actually used on roads and were neither suitable for use on roads. Rather they were being used on closed premises of the respondents. On that premises, it was claimed that dumpers and shovels were outside the Taxation Act. The appellants herein opposed the petition and claimed that dumpers and shovels were adapted and suitable for use on roads and hence liable to be taxed under the Taxation Act. The learned Judicial Commissioner, on the interpretation of the provisions of the Taxation Act, as well as taking stock of the fact situation, came to the view that when dumpers and shovels were being used solely on the premises of the owner, they have therefore to be excluded from the purview of the Taxation Act since public roads were not being used by those vehicles. Support for the view was taken from Bolani Ores Ltd. v. State of Orissa (1975) 2 SCR 138. It is to challenge that view that the Union of India and its officers are before us.
(3.) It may, at the outset, be necessary to differentiate inter se dumpers and shovels. Dumpers denominated as Euclid Dumpers by Writ Petitioners-respondents in three Writ Petitions Nos. 2/69, 12/69 and 48/ 70, stand well understood and described in Bolani Ores case (supra) and in M/s. Central Coal Fields Ltd. v. State of Orissa decided by this Court today on 29-4-1992. To quote from the later case (Para 2): "Dumpers and Rockers, are known to carry bulk goods, building materials, mining products, agricultural and forestry products, earth, stones, bricks, concrete, mortar etc., their structure being of simple design and easy to handle. Tripping is performed by releasing the locking device retaining tipping body. The Dumper requires no more than a few seconds for the emptying of its tipping body and gives no trouble to the driver when being operated on uphill or downhill roads, with its load unoalanced or when the load refuses to slide out easily." This Court in the aforesaid two cases has held dumpers to be motor vehicles adapted or suitable for use on roads and hence attracting tax under the relevant Taxation Act of Orissa. So far as shovels are concerned they are used only by writ petitioners-respondents in Writ Petition No. 47 / 70. These did not fall to be defined or described in Bolani Ores case. However, in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Report in Bolani Ores case (supra), it is evident that shovels stood excluded from being described as motor vehicles for the purposes of registration and sequally for taxation at the High Court level, for it was found that shovels had a sort of crawler mechanism and were not adapted for regular use on the roads. But here, instantly, in Writ Petition No. 47/70, the concerned respondents had barely pleaded that shovels were used for removing earth from faces and for dumping the same in the rejection yard. It has further been pleaded that the said shovels are not intended to be used, nor are capable of being used, nor were they, in fact, being used, on roads by the Writ Petitioners for any general use. Still further it was pleaded that shovels were vehicles of a special type adapted for use only within the enclosed premises and not fit for use on roads. These facts were denied by the contesting Government officers. Reliance for the purpose was made on the definition of 'motor vehicle' used in Section 2(18) of the Act to prove their point of view. The learned Judicial Commissioner drawing no distinction between dumpers and shovels proceeded to grant common relief to all the writ petitioners primarily on the basis that these vehicles were employed for use in the owner's premises.;