(Ranjan Gogoi, C.J. and Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.)
Cantonment Board and Another _____________________ Appellant(s);
v.
Gajraj Singh and Others __________________________ Respondent(s).
Civil Appeal No(s). 2541/2006, decided on January 31, 2019
With
C.A. No. 10724-10725/2011 C.A. No. 3533/2016
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. By order dated 19th January, 2011 a Division Bench of this Court has referred to a larger Bench the question of jurisdiction and authority of the Cantonment Board to impose and levy toll tax under Section 60 of the Cantonment Act, 1924. It was also observed that correctness of the decision in Ramgarh Cantonment Board v. State of Jharkhand1 requires reconsideration.
2. Having heard Shri Vikas Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant in Civil Appeal Nos. 10724-10725 of 2011 [Cantonment Board, Dehradun] we are of the view that in view of the enactment of Cantonment Act, 2006, which vide Section 67(e) thereof authorizes the Cantonment Board to levy “licence fee on entry of vehicles”, the question referred has become academic. Following the enactment of Cantonment Act, 2006 the Cantonment Board would be authorized to impose the levy as per Section 67(e) of the Cantonment Act, 2006.
3. By virtue of the interim orders, the appellants – Cantonment Boards have levied and collected toll from users. Obviously, no accounts have been maintained and could have been maintained. Thus, even if we are to hold the question referred against the Cantonment Boards, the question of refund will not arise. We, therefore, decline to go into the said question on the ground that the same has been rendered academic by the enactment of the Cantonment Act, 2006. No orders for refund of the levy collected ought to be made. We order accordingly.
4. All appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2541/2006
Cantonment Board & Anr ___________________________ Appellant(s)
v.
Gajraj Singh & Ors _______________________________ Respondent(s)
WITH
C.A. NO. 3533/2016 (III-A)
C.A. NO. 10724-10725/2011 (X)
Date : 31-01-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today.
(Before Ranjan Gogoi, C.J. and Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.)
For parties: CA 2541/2006 Mr. Aman Lekhi, ASG [N/P]
Mrs. Rekha Pandey, AOR
Ms. Smriti Kumari, Adv.
CA No. 10724-725/11 Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, AOR
Mr. N. Sai Vinod, Adv.
Mr. Dhananjay Baijal, Adv.
Mr. Divyanshu Rai, Adv.
Mr. Naveen Hegde, Adv.
CA No. 3533/16 Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, AOR
Mr. N. Sai Vinod, Adv.
Mr. Dhananjay Baijal, Adv.
Mr. Divyanshu Rai, Adv.
Mr. Naveen Hegde, Adv.
Mrs. Rani Chhabra, AOR
Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, AOR
Mr. Aman Lekhi, ASG [N/P]
Mr. A. K. Sanghi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mukul Singh, Adv.
Mr. V. Balaji, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
Ms. Neetica Sharma, Adv.
for M/s. M. V. Kini & Associates, AOR
Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain, AOR
Mr. Punya Garg, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Jain, Adv. Ms. Anusha Agarwal, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
5. The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order.
6. Consequently all pending applications including the application for impleadment shall stand disposed of.
———
1. (2008) 11 SCC 223
