Allahabad High Court
Girish Kumar And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 7 Others on 6 October, 2015
Bench: Tarun Agarwala, Surya Prakash Kesarwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 797 of 2015
Petitioner :- Girish Kumar And 4 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Udit Chandra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Tarun Agarwala,J.
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
The petitioners claim to be engaged in the business of transportation of Sand Stone, Polish Stone, Rough Stone, Gitti, Rolli, Crushed Stone, Stone Dust, Bajri, Reta etc. from industries/ factories/ crushers situated in the State of Uttarakhand into the State of Uttar Pradesh. The reliefs which have been sought in these proceedings are as follows :-
"(i). To issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from charging transit fee from the writ petitioners who are doing the business of transportation of Sand Stone, Polish Stone, Rough Stone, Gitti, Rolli, Crushed Stone, Stone Dust, Bajri, Reta etc. from the factories/crushers situated in the State of Uttarakhand & Rajasthan.
(ii) To issue writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to refund the amount of transit fee which have been charged by the respondents from the writ petitioners."
The petitioners have relied on the interim orders which were passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 6 January 2010 in Writ Tax No.5 of 2010 (Agra Stone Traders Association Sewla and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) and the interim order passed by the Supreme Court dated 17 December 2009 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal(Civil) No(s). 11923/2009 (Kailash Chandra and others Vs. State of U.P. and others). Subsequently, the Supreme Court has, by an order dated 29 October 2013 passed in Petition(s) for Special Leave to
Appeal (Civil) No(s).11367/2007 (Kanhaiya Singh and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) modified the earlier interim orders which were passed in batch of cases in the following terms :-
"We are, therefore, inclined to modify the orders suitably to the following effect:
1) The State shall be free to recover transit fee for forest produce removed from within the State of U.P. at the rate stipulated in the 3rd amendment to the Rules mentioned in the earlier part of this order.
2) Any such recovery shall remain subject to the ultimate outcome of present petitions pending in this Court.
3) In the event of writ petitioners/private parties succeeding in their cases, the amount deposited/recovered from them shall be refunded to them with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date the deposit was made till actual refund.
4) The State shall maintain accurate amount of recovery made and the nature and the quantum/quantity of the produce removed by the private parties concerned.
5) Even in the 2nd batch of cases arising out of Writ Petition No.975 of 2004 whereby the High Court has struck down the 4th and 5th amendment to the Rules, the State shall be free to make recoveries in terms of the 3rd amendment in regard to the forest produce removed from within the State of U.P. The operation of the orders passed by the High Court shall to that extent remain stayed."
In view of the subsequent order of the Supreme Court, a Division Bench of this Court by an order dated 28 November 2013 passed in Writ Tax No.967 of 2013 (M/s Rama Traders Vs. State of U.P. and 7 others) disposed of the writ petition in terms
of the directions which were issued by the Supreme Court with an observation that the realisation of the transit fee in the manner as directed by the Supreme Court shall be subject to the final decision by the Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition against the judgments of this Court.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has no objection to the same order being passed.
In the circumstances, we dispose of the petition in terms of the directions which have been issued by the Supreme Court on 29 October 2013 as quoted above. The realisation of the transit fee in the manner as directed by the Supreme Court will be subject to the final decision of the Supreme Court in the pending Special Leave Petitions against the judgment of this Court.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 6.10.2015
MAA/-
(Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.) (Tarun Agarwala,J.)
