Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. In W. P. No. 2951/9 Ion behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, second respondent has filed a counter-affidavit disputing various averments made by the petitioner therein. It is stated that the Municipality has not neglected to provide necessary civic amenities. On account of the mounting expenditure in providing the amenities, the third respondent has no other option except to augment its income by increasing the taxation. Enhancement of tax is not an unique feature peculiar to third respondent, but the same is prevalent in all the other Municipalities all over the State. On account of the increase in expenditure by way of salary to staff etc., the increase in the cost of supervision becomes inevitable. Therefore, there is nothing arbitrary or illegal in proposing an enhancement in the licence fee. There is no steep increase in the annual licence fee. The old fee had been fixed long ago as far back as 1976 and the gradual rise in the expenditure during the succeeding 14 years is properly reflected in resolution No. 638 dated 30-10-90. The representation by the lodge owners were considered and rejected as they had no merits. The resolution of the Municipal Council is made only under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act. 1920. The G.O. Ms. No. 1432, Health, Indian Medicine, Homeopathy and Family Welfare Department, dated 7-8-90 was relied upon only to fix the rates of licence fees. It is true that the Association gave a petition dated 22-2-91 requesting the Government to stay the resolution No. 918. dated 29-1-91 of the Erode Municipality. While the request was being examined with reference to the provisions in Section 36 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 the Association filed the said writ petition. In passing the impugned resolution, the Erode Municipal Council was fully aware that a licencee fee is imposed for covering the probable expenses which may have to be incurred for the regulation of the particular trade or business in respect of which the licence is required. A licence fee is charged to defray the costs, involved in the regulation and administration of the trade. What is levied is only a licence fee and not a registration fee. The impugned levy is perfectly legal and quite in conformity with the provisions contained in the said Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act. There are periodical inspection by the public Health staff every month. The rubbish and other refuse materials gathered from the lodges are removed by the conservance staff for no extra charges. In addition to the above mentioned services, the Municipality is also applying disinfectants around the lodges every day. Again, anti-cholera and anti-typhoid inoculations are also given to the workers and inmates of lodges whenever necessary. The calculations furnished by the petitioner are not correct or realistic. Although the services rendered need not be equal to the fee levied in mathematical accuracy. It is not correct to state that the Municipality is making any profit out of the collections of licence fee. The licence fee is in the nature of a tax and does not require to satisfy the norm of quid pro quo. With these averments they prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.