Arun Chandrabhan Nawale v. Nashik Municipal Corporation & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of the above statutory provision and the figures of octroi collection, when the octroi was being collected by the employees of the Municipal Corporation and the octroi collection for the last year as well as the bids received for this year, we…
Judgment
Ms. Shiba Mukadam i/by M/s. Dinesh Tiwari & Associates for the petitioner. Mr. S.G. Aney, Senior Advocate with Mr. L.M. Acharya for respondent No.1. Mr. N.P. Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.2. Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni for respondent No.3. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & D.G. KARNIK, J. Wednesday, April 27, 2011 P.C. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India purporting to be PIL, the petitioner who is resident of Nashik has challenged the tender notices dated 31st March, 2011 and 11th April, 2011 inviting offers for appointment of agent for collection of octroi and escort fee of the Municipal Corporation of the City of Nashik for the year 2011-2012.
One of the grounds raised in the memo of petition is that the Municipal Corporation ought not to have decided to allow the private party to collect the octroi.
The learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation has invited our attention to the figures of octroi collection for the five years 2005-2006 to 2009-2010 when the octroi was being collected by the employees of Nashik Municipal Corporation. The figures are as under:- 2 pil-49-11.sxw Financial year Octroi Collection (in crores) 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 : : : : : Rs. 258.84 cr. Rs.309.13 cr. Rs.370.21 cr. Rs.370.83 cr. Rs.376.63 cr. (upto 19.3.2010)
The learned counsel for the Corporation further states that for the first time the octroi was collected through the contractor for the year 2010-2011 and the octroi collection was Rs.474 crores. It is further stated that for the current year, tender notice was stipulated reserve amount of Rs.521 crores and Corporation has received eligible offers in excess of Rs.521 crores.
Our attention is also invited to the provision of section 66A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 which reads as under:- "[66A. Performance of functions by agencies.- When any duty has been imposed on, or any function has been assigned to, a Corporation under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, or a Corporation has been entrusted with the implementation of a scheme, by the State Government or any other authority,- the Corporation may, either discharge such duty or (i) perform such function or implement such schemes by itself; (ii) subject to such directions as may be issued and the terms and conditions as may be determined by the State Government, cause it to be discharged, performed or implemented by any agency: 3 pil-49-11.sxw Provided that, the Corporation may also specify terms and conditions, not inconsistent with the terms and conditions determined by the State Government for such agency arrangements.]
In view of the above statutory provision and the figures of octroi collection, when the octroi was being collected by the employees of the Municipal Corporation and the octroi collection for the last year as well as the bids received for this year, we see no merit in this petition. The petition is, therefore, summarily dismissed.
It is clarified that as regards the other challenges to the tender notice, since those challenges are also raised in Writ Petition No.3044 of 2011, we do not propose to decide the challenge based on the other grounds raised in this petition and all other contentions are kept open. CHIEF JUSTICE D.G. KARNIK, J.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.