Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.18 seconds)
Kodaikanal Motor Bus Owners' vs Government Of Tamil Nadu on 1 February, 2010 cites

Maheshwari Singh vs State Of Bihar And Ors. on 5 May, 1966

12. The provisions of the Central Act have been considered by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the decision reported in Maheswari Singh v. State of Bihar [AIR 1966 Patna 462]. It has been held by the Bench that the expression 'Tolls' used was intended to convey the same meaning as was given to the expression in British viz., a levy for the purpose of providing funds for the maintenance of roads and bridges and repayment of the loan, if any, for that construction. The preamble to the Central Act provides that the Central Act has been enacted to enable the Government to levy tolls on roads and public bridges. The toll has been levied to create a fund for laying of public roads and construction of bridges, and for the maintenance of roads and bridges. It is not necessary that the toll must be correlated to the actual expenses of construction or maintenance of a particular bridge. Section 2 of the Central Act clearly lays down the guidelines for levy of toll.
Patna High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Kodaikanal Motor Bus Owners' vs Government Of Tamil Nadu on 30 April, 2002

5. In respect of similar notification issued for the year 2001-2002, the very same Petitioner Association filed W.P.Nos.21278/2000 and 21949/2000 respectively. By common Judgment dated 30.04.2002, learned single Judge upheld the levy and dismissed the Writ Petitions which has been reported in 2002 (2) MLJ 538 [Kodaikanal Motor Bus Owners' Association v. Government of Tamil Nadu and others]. Similarly, for the year 2001-2002, Petitioner filed W.P.No.13367/2001 and the same was dismissed by the learned single Judge on 15.09.2003. As against the order of learned single Judge dated 15.09.2003 in W.P.No.13367/2001, Appellant Association preferred Writ Appeal in W.A.No.1776/2002. For the year 2002-2003, Petitioner filed W.P.No.31458/2002 and for the year 2003-2004, Petitioner filed W.P.No.29054/2003. Similarly, for the year 2005-2006, Petitioner Association filed W.P.No.31711/2005 and for the year 2006-2007, Petitioner filed W.P.No.25811/2006 and for the year 2007-2008, Petitioner filed W.P.Nos.36059/2007 and 20870/2008. Petitioner Association also filed W.P.No.17082/2009 for the year 2009-2010.
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1