Kerala High Court
Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited vs State Of Kerala on 1 June, 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1940
WA.No. 2620 of 2017 IN WPC. 10972/2007
--------------------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 10972/2007 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 01-06-2007
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:
-----------------------
BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST.GENERAL MANAGER
PLANNING, THRISSUR.
BY ADV.SMT.S.K.DEVI,SC, BSNL
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
-------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. THE SECRETARY
THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR-680001.
R1 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFIQ.
R2 BY ADV. SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR CORPORATION
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-03-2018,
THE COURT ON 13-04-2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ.
-------------------------------------------
W.A.No. 2620 of 2017
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of April, 2018
JUDGMENT
Ashok Menon, J.
M/s.Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited ('BSNL' for short) is the appellant before us, aggrieved with the dismissal of WP(C) No.10972/2007 by the learned Single Judge.
2. The appellant is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 15.9.2000. Prior to its incorporation as a Company, the telecommunication services were being provided by Government of India, Ministry of Telecommunication through its Departments namely, Department of Telecommunication Services and the Department of Telecommunication Operations. Pursuant to the Government of India Policy for providing telecom services, the Company was constituted as a fully owned Government of India Enterprises by taking over the businesses provided by the above mentioned two Departments. The Company started functioning with effect from 1.10.2000. BSNL has a Telephone Exchange situated and also staff quarters at Poothole, Thrissur. WA 2620/17 2
3. The Local Self Government Department of Government of Kerala issued circular No.43657/D4/204 dated 9.12.2004 by which all Self Government Institutions were directed to levy property tax in respect of all buildings/properties belonging to the erstwhile Telecom Department, Government of India, with effect from the date of incorporation of the appellant Company.
4. Pursuant to this circular, the Secretary of Thrissur Corporation, the 2nd respondent herein, issued Ext.P1 notice on 9.9.2006 demanding a sum of Rs.3,86,268/- and another notice as Ext.P2 dated 22.9.2006 demanding a sum of Rs.9,03,174/- towards property tax due from the appellant Company for the Telephone Exchange and the staff quarters, respectively, for the period from 2000-01 to 2006-07. On receipt of the said demand notices, the appellant Company issued a letter as Ext.P3 dated 14.10.2006 contending that the ownership and title of the said buildings continue with the Department of Telecommunication, Government of India and as such, those buildings are exempted from taxation under Article 285 of the Constitution of India. Apprehending that the Corporation would proceed against them, the Company WA 2620/17 3 approached this Court with the Writ Petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Exts.P1 and P2 demand notices as well as a writ of mandamus forbearing the 2nd respondent for enforcing payment of the amount demanded as per Exts.P1 and P2 as those buildings belong to Government of India and are exempted from payment of tax.
5. The learned Single Judge relied on the decisions in Western Coalfields Ltd. v. Special Area Development Authority (1982 (1) SCC 125), Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Secretary, Revenue Department, Govt. of A.P. (1999 (4) SCC 458) and Food Corporation of India v. Municipal Committee, Jalalabad (1999 (6) SCC 74) to come to the conclusion that the appellant Company consequent to its incorporation under the Companies Act has a legal entity distinct and separate from the Central Government. It has a corporate personality of its own and in that context, the properties/buildings in respect of which property tax has been levied by the 2nd respondent under the Kerala Municipalities Act, 1994 are owned by the said Company and not by Government of India. Hence, the appellant cannot claim exemption from tax under Article 285 of the Constitution of India in respect of WA 2620/17 4 its properties. The demand made as per Exts.P1 and P2 is found perfectly legal, warranting no interference and the Writ Petition was therefore dismissed. As to the term BSNL, being a distinct entity as distinguished from as distinguished from Union of India, and the inapplicability of Article 285 needs no reiteration and we need just refer to Municipal Commissioner of Dum Dum Municipality v. Indian Tourism Development Corporation, (1995) 5 SCC 251 .
6. The appellant is aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of the learned Single Judge and questions its validity. The only ground under which the impugned judgment stands challenged is that the learned Single Judge ought to have found that though the appellant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and is a legal entity distinct from the Central Government, the ownership of the property on which the demands were raised under Exts.P1 and P2 continues to remain with the Government of India and are therefore exempted from levy of tax under Article 285 of the Constitution of India.
7. During the course of argument, the learned Senior Govt. Pleader produced the annual report for the year 2015-2016 WA 2620/17 5 and the same was marked as Ext.C1. Annexure I(i)(c) of Ext.C1 provides as follows:-
b