- (1.) THIS review petition is directed against Judgement of the Division Bench dated July 31,1986 passed in D. B. Civil Special Appeal No. 46 of 1984 (Pabudan Singh vs. State of Raj. & ors.) alongwith 49 other special appeals.
(2.) THE contention of the petitioner-appellant is that actually, in the writ petition bearing No. 2083 of 1983, the validity and the vires of the provisions contained in s. 4-B and proviso (ii) and (iii) appended to ss. 14 and 17 of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1951 (for short 'the Act') as amended by Amendment Act of 1982 were challenged on various grounds. However, while upholding the validity of those provisions, the learned single Judge partly allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to decide the matter in accordance with the observations made in the judgement. Before the learned single Judge, it was contended by the petitioner-appellant that even if the validity of s. 4-B of the Act is upheld, as per Notification S. O. 96, published in Rajasthan Gazette (Extra-ordinary ) (Part 4 (Ga) (II) dated 1. 10. 1982),he being a holder of a permit of the city route i. e. city bus route known as Haldi Ghati-Undari route, he shoud be taxed at the rates prescribed by the aforesaid notification for stage carriages plying exclusively in municipal or city limits. Whiledealing with this contention, the learned single Judge has observed as under: "the intention of the Legislature is very clear that city buses should be limited only within the municipal limits and if it extends beyond municipal limits then it is a stage carriage for all purposes and it cannot get the advantage, which is made available to the city buses. I agree with Mr. Mridul when he submits that this will cause great inconvenience to the people who are living in the towns and are getting facilities of city buses. THE Court cannot extend the benefit which is available under the law to the holder of such permits who are plying beyond city limits or municipal limits even for a kilometer. THE Govt. should take note of such a hardship and should try to do something to serve the cause of the travelling public. However, no relief can be granted to such persons. " Aggrieved against this finding of the learned single Judge, the petitioner filed a special appeal bearing No. 79 of 1984 and against this finding, he raised grounds No. 25 and 42 in the memo of appeal of that special appeal. It was contended by him that demand raised by the respondents is excessive and he is required to pay a sum of Rs. 19,000/- per year as Special Road Tax under s. 4-B of the Act, as amended by Amendment Act of 1982. It has been contended by the petitioner-appellant in this review petition that about this contention, no specific finding has been given by the learned Division Bench while deciding special appeal, although this contention was specifically raised in the memo of appeal and was argued at the time of hearing but as the judgement was delivered by the learned Judges of the Division Bench after the expiry of about one and half years of the conclusion of the arguments, that point escaped their notice. We have heard Mr. R. N. Munshi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-appellant and Mr. C. R. Jhakhar, the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate and have carefully gone through the record of the case. Item No. 2 of the Notification S. O. 96 deals with the rates of special road tax relating to stage carriages plying exclusively in municipal or city limits and it reads as under: "2. Stage Carriage Plying Exclusively in Municipal or City Limits. (a) For the First 20 seats: Rs. 500/- per seat per annum. (b) For the next 20 seats: Rs. 300/- per seat per annum. (c) For the next seats above 40: Rs. 250/- per seat per annum. Note: Where the owner holds permit for more than one vehicle with a condition to operate any of the vehicle on the route covered by the permit, the seating capacity shall be reckoned on the average seating capacity of the entire fleet of buses, according to the classification of service mentioned at S. No. l. " The contention of the petitioner-appellant is that he holds the city bus route permit for the route Haldi Ghati-Undari route and therefore, he should be charged at the concessional rates which are prescribed under item No. 2 of Notification S. O 96. He should not be charged at the normal rates of stage carriages. This contention cannot be sustained. Mr. Munshi was specifically asked as to whether 'the city' or 'municipal limits' have been defined either in the Motor Vehicles Act or in the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1951 or in the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules,1951. He frankly conceded that the 'city or municipal limits' have not been defined in these enactments. However, he has contended that once the R. T. A. has opened a city bus route known as Haldi Ghati-Undari route vide its resolution dated 14th,15th and 16th of December,1971, the taxing authorities have no right to challenge their decision and not to treat their vehicles as City buses for the purposes of Special Road Tax. This contention of Mr. Munshi is totally misconceived. It is not a case of treating a particular route to be a city bus route or not ? The Notification S. O. 96 only provides that stage carriages plying exclusively in municipal limits or city limits will be charged special road tax at the particular rates prescribed therein. Now, we will have to examine whether this Haldi Ghati-Undari route lies within the 'municipal' or 'city limits' or not? Admittedly, the RTA has opened the city bus route known as Haldi Ghati-Undari route vide its resolution dated 14th,15th, and 16th December,1971 and has fixed a scope of two buses to perform six return service,which have been increased to two buses to perform 12 return services but it does not mean that Haldi Ghati-Undari route becomes a route, in which the vehicles are exclusively plied within the 'municipal ' or 'city limits'.
(3.) IN this respect, Mr. R. N. Munshi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-appellant has drawn our attention to a Division Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Smt. Sk. Mumtaz Begum V. RTO cum Licensing Officer, Nellore (1), wherein it has been held that so long as stage carriage permit is granted on a route which is determined as a town service route by the RTA, the authorities under the Taxation Act will have to accept that determination as final and levy tax only as town service routes. They have no jurisdiction to go into the question whether it is a town service route or not, so long as the determination under r. 282 subsists. That was a case of grant of permit on a town service route and tax was to be collected on the basis of that fact. Here, the permit has no concern whatsoever with the levy of special road tax. The special road tax has to be collected from the different classes of Motor Vehicles. However, a concession has been granted for stage carriages plying exclusively in municipal or city limts and not beyond it. Even if a permit is granted on a particular route treating that route to be a city bus route and that route may lie outside the municipal or city limits but that will not entitle the holders of that city route permit to the concessional rates of special road tax. The terms 'city' and 'municipality' have been defined in Rajasthan Municipalities Act,1959 (for short 'the Act of 1959' ). S. 3 (5) of the Act of 1959 defines 'city' means a municipality having a population of not less than fifty thousand inhabitants. S. 3 (16) of the Act of 1959 defines 'municipality ' means any local area which is at the commencement of this Act a municipality and any local area which may hereafter be constituted a municipality under s. 4. Thus, if we read the provisions of ss. 3 (5) and 3 (16) of the Act of 1959 together with item No. 2 of Notification S. O. 96, we will definitely come to the conclusion that if a bus is plied within the local areas of the Udaipur Municipality, which has a population of more than fifty thousand inhabitants then that vehicle would be exclusively taxable as per the rates prescribed at item No. 2 of Notification S. O. 96 but if a vehicle is plied beyond the local limits of the Udaipur Municipality or the city of Udaipur then the concessional rates of special road tax provided in Notification S. O. 96 cannot be made applicable to such a vehicle and such a vehicle would be liable to levy of special road tax at the rates which are prescribed in item No. l of Notification S. O. 96 for normal stage carriages. In this view of the matter, we are firmly of the view that the vehicles of the petitioner are not exclusively plied in the municipal or city limits of Udaipur and, therefore, the vehicles of petitioner which are plied on the city bus route, known as Haldi Ghati-Undari route, which falls beyond the local area of Udaipur municipality or the city of Udaipur are liable to be taxed as per item No. l of Notification S. O. 96, relating to the normal stage carriages. The petitioner is not entitled to claim concessional rates of special road tax as provided in item No. 2 of Notification S. O. 96 relating to the stage carriages exclusively plied within the municipal or city limits. Thus, the view taken by the learned single Judge which has not been set aside by the Division Bench of this Court need not be reviewed. ;