Yashoda Nandan, J. - (1.) The petitioners are owners of stage carriages, Which transport pilgrims Wisiting Gangotri or Jamnotri, which are two shrines of religious importance, situate within the district of Uttar Kashi. The petitioner alleged and it is not denied that they carry passengers on their stage carriages between Bhairoghati to Gangotri and vice versa. The Zila parishad, Uttar Kashi, respondent no. 1 is under supersession and respondent no. 2 the District Magistrate of Uttar Kashi is functioning as Administrator of the Zila Parishad purporting to be acting under Section 239 of the U.P. Kshettra Samiti and Zila Parishad Adhiniyam. 1961 framed bye-laws, a true copy of which has been filed as annexure no. 1 to this petition. Bye-law no. 1, as would appears from annexure no. 1, prohibits vehicles of any description being parked anywhere except at such place as is provided by the Zila Parishad. Under bye-law no. 2 the rate of fee, which would be payable by the owners of the vehicles, who are compulsorily required to park the vehicles at the place assigned by the Zila Parishad, is provided. The petitioners were served with notices of demand requiring them to pay the amount disclosed in them as fee under the above-mentioned bye-law. By means of this petition they challenge the legality of the demand and the bye-law under which the demand has been made. It has been alleged in various paragraphs of this petition that the owners of the vehicles, who are compelled to park their vehicles at the places assigned by the Zila Parishad, are provided with no facilities by the Zila Parishad in return of the fee they are required to pay. These allegations have been vaguely denied in the counter-affidavit. In the view which we propose to take, it is unnecessary To decide the question as to whether there exists any element of quid pro quo which saves the legality of the demand made by the Zila Parishad as fee from the petitioners.
(2.) Section 239 of the U.P. Kshettra Samiti and Zila Parishad Adhiniyam Act in terms is practically identical with Section 298 of the U.P. Municipalities Act. The Municipal Board, Pithoragath had framed bye-laws, purporting to have done so in exercise of the power under Section. 298 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, compelling the drivers of motor bus, lorries, trucks, jeeps and station wagons plying ou commercial basis not to park their vehicles at any place within the limits of Nagar Palika other than the motor stand provided by the Municipal Board. The validity of the bye law which prescribed the fee charge-from the drivers of vehicles, who had to park them at the places fixed by the Municipal Board, was subject-matter of challenge in this Court in Jagdish Chandra and another v. State of U.P. and another (1975 ALJ 571)A learned single Judge of this Court struck done the bye law impugned holding that the Municipal Board had no power under the Act to frame bye-laws compelling the owners of the vehicles to park them at the places fixed for that purpose by the Board and to render them liable to pay a fee on that account. In support of the view taken, the learned Judge placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in Municipal Council Bhopal v. Sindhi Sahiti Multi Purpose Transport Co-op. Society Ltd. and another (AIR 1973 SC 2420). In that decision the Supreme Court held that Madhya Pradesh, Municipal Board, was not empowered to pass a bye law declaring a certain place as a Municipal Bus Stand and cannot compel the persons plying motor buses for hire not to park buses anywhere within the municipal limits except at such places as were provided for that purpose by the Municipal Board. The provisions of the Act under which the Zila Parishad purport to have framed the bye-laws are similar to the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act which came up for consideration before the Supreme Court.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners endeavoured to support the levy as one permissible under Section 144 of the U P. Kshettra Samiti and Zila Parishad Achiniyam. Section 144 of the Act runs as under : "144. Certain other fees. With the previous sanction of the State Government, a Zila Parishad or Kshettra Samiti may fix and levy schools fees, fees for the use of libraries and Sarai and paraos, fees for the use of, or benefits derived from any of the works or institutions constructed and maintained by the Zila Parishad or the Kshettra Samiti originally undertaken as famine preventive or relief works, fees for the service of bulls and stations, and industrial exhibitions held under its authority or otherwise, to which the public is allowed access and at which the Zila Parishad or the Kshettra Samiti provides fantasy and other facilities for the public and tolls for the use of bridges constructed, repaired or maintained by the Zila Parishad or Kshett a Samiti.";