JUDGEMENT
R.K.AGRAWAL,J. -
(1.) Challenge in the above said appeals is to the legality of the impugned common judgment and order dated 14.11.2011
rendered by learned single Judge of the High Court for the
States of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in F.A.O. Nos.
3372 and 3488 of 2011 whereby the High Court allowed the appeals filed by the respondent-State.
(2.) Factual position in a nutshell is as follows:-
(a) On 22.06.2005, a Concession Agreement was entered into between the Government of Punjab (through Director, State Transport, Punjab) and M/s Welspun Projects Ltd. (formerly known as M/s MSK Projects India Ltd.)-the appellant-Company to design, finance, construct, operate and maintain the Bus Terminal Project at Jalandhar on Build, Operate and Transfer (B.O.T) basis and to determine, levy, demand, collect and retain the fees for a period of 8 years, 5 months and 21 days.
(b) A similar Concession Agreement was entered into between the parties mentioned above for the Bus Terminal at Ludhiana on the same basis for a period of 10 years and 3 months.
(c) On 16.08.2005 and 25.10.2005, lease deeds were entered into between the parties for the project sites at Jalandhar and Ludhiana respectively. According to the said lease deeds, the appellant-Company was required to pay only the annual rent of Re. 1 as lease rental.
(d) On 26.11.2008, the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar-Respondent No. 2 herein issued a notice under Section 103 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (in short 'the Act') stating that the premises in question was assessed for an annual rental value of Rs. 3,98,73,600/- for the year 2008-09.
(e) Similarly, on 08.02.2010, the appellant-Company received a notice from the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana stating the house tax assessment for the year 2008-09 and 2009-10 had been carried out and the said property at Ludhiana was assessed at Rs.64,59,588.80/- for an annual rental value of the premises.
(f) The appellant-Company informed Respondent No. 2 herein that it was handling the project on BOT basis and as such the actual owner is the State Transport Authorities. However, when the contents of the notices were brought to the knowledge of the State Transport Authorities, the State Transport Authorities informed that the appellant-Company is the actual user, occupant and beneficiary of the properties of the Bus Terminals and as such is liable to pay all taxes including House Tax as per the terms and conditions of the Concession Agreements.
(g) Being aggrieved by the demand notices, the appellant-Company approached the High Court. The High Court, vide order dated 09.02.2010 directed the appellant-Company to approach Punjab Infrastructure Regulatory Authority (PIRA). The appellant-Company preferred Petition Nos. 1 and 2 of 2010 before the PIRA against the State Transport Authorities of Jalanadhar and Ludhiana respectively.
(h) Vide orders dated 08.09.2010 and 15.12.2010, the PIRA allowed the petitions filed by the appellant-Company. Being aggrieved by the above orders, the State Transport Authorities preferred F.A.O. Nos. 3372 and 3488 of 2011 before the High Court.
(i) Learned single Judge of the High Court, vide common judgment and order dated 14.11.2011, allowed the appeals filed by the respondents herein.
(j) Aggrieved by the order dated 14.11.2011, the appellant-Company has preferred these petitions before this Court by way of special leave.
(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.