Rushabh Outdoors And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 6 April, 2026

    0
    44
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Bombay High Court

    Rushabh Outdoors And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 6 April, 2026

    2026:BHC-OS:8293-DB
    
    
                                                                                     WP-227-2027.doc
    
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                  WRIT PETITION NO.227 OF 2017
                1. Rushabh Outdoors, Thane                                   ]
                2. Vandana Borse,                                            ]
                   Proprietor of M/s. Synnovation, Mumbai                    ] .. Petitioners
                                  Versus
                1. The State of Maharashtra,                                 ]
                2. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai                   ] .. Respondents
                Mr. Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aseem Naphade,
                Mr. Akash Rebello, Mr. Jatin Sheth, Ms. Chaitra Rao and Ms.
                Meera Parmar, Advocates for the Petitioners.
                Dr. Birendra Saraf, Advocate General with Mr. Milind V. More,
                Additional Government Pleader and Mr. Jay Sanklecha, "B" Panel
                Counsel for Respondent No.1-State of Maharashtra.
                Mr. Suresh B. Pakale, Senior Advocate with Ms. K. H. Mastakar
                i/by Ms. Komal Punjabi, Advocates for Respondent No.2-MCGM.
    
                                        CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. &
                                                GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
                          Reserved on               : 16th December 2025.
                          Pronounced on             : 06th April 2026
                                                     JUDGMENT
    

    Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, C.J. :

    M/s. Rushabh Outdoors which is a partnership firm and
    represented through its partners, namely, Navnit Haria and
    Zaverben Liladhar Haria is joined by the proprietress of M/s.
    Synnovation, namely, Vandana Borse in laying a challenge to sub-
    section (2) of section 479 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation
    Act, 18881. The petitioners are seeking a declaration that sub-
    section (2) of section 479 of the MMC Act is unconstitutional and
    liable to be struck down. They are aggrieved by Resolution No.999
    passed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai in its
    meeting held on 11th December 2009 by which a revision in the
    schedule of fees for the advertisement license issued under
    1 MMC Act
    1
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:44 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    sections 328 and 328A of the MMC Act was approved and
    increased by 80 percent of the prevailing rate for one year and
    then it is to be increased by 10 percent per annum every following
    year. The petitioners have challenged the power of the
    Commissioner to fix the rates of license fees and it is in that
    context that they are raising a question to the constitutional
    validity of sub-section (2) of section 479 of the MMC Act.

    2. The petitioners state that they obtain a license from the
    Municipal Corporation under sections 328/328A of the MMC Act
    on payment of license fees for carrying on the business of outdoor
    publicity. The Municipal Corporation proposed a revision in the
    license fees for the permissions granted under sections 328 and
    328A and the said proposal contained in the letter dated 4 th
    November 2009 was considered by the Law Committee and it was
    decided to take approval of the Municipal Corporation. The
    reasons for seeking a revision in the license fees are said to be the
    rising expenditure for the establishment of the Municipal
    Corporation, an increase in the wholesale price index and service
    costs, decline in the revenue of the Municipal Corporation from
    the license fees etc. However, the information received by them
    through the RTI is that the Municipal Corporation has reserves
    and surplus of Rs.47244.56 crores (excluding inter budget
    contributions) and its consolidated income far exceeds its
    expenditure. The petitioners have provided the details of the
    license fees collected by the Municipal Corporation for the period
    between 2007 to 2016 and endeavored to demonstrate that the
    total income of the Municipal Corporation from the advertising
    licenses constitutes about 69 percent of the total collection of the
    License Department. The petitioners blame the Commissioner for
    not applying his mind before proposing increase in the license
    2
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    fees. They say that the Municipal Corporation also did not apply
    its mind and approved the proposal for increase in the license fees
    in a mechanical manner inasmuch as there was no discussion in
    the meeting of the Municipal Corporation held on 11 th December
    2009. They contend that the effect of 10 percent increase in
    perpetuity in the license fees is excessive, arbitrary and
    unreasonable and violates their fundamental rights under Articles
    14
    and 19 of the Constitution of India.

    3. In the affidavit-in-reply, the respondents have narrated the
    procedure for granting permission for advertisement and claim
    that several high-ranking officers of different departments
    including the officers in the rank of Assistant Commissioner are
    involved in the entire process at different stages and it is not true
    that the License Department alone is involved in the whole
    process. The Municipal Corporation has taken a preliminary
    objection to maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of
    delay and laches on the part of the petitioners to challenge the
    impugned resolution dated 11th December 2009. It has set up an
    objection on the ground of constructive res judicata as a similar
    challenge made to the impugned resolution was dismissed in “Yog
    Advertising and Marketing Services2”. It is pleaded that the
    impugned resolution has been in operation for more than eight
    years and the petitioners availed advertising rights under the said
    resolution on payment of license fees in previous years. Before
    “Yog Advertising and Marketing Services”, there was an increase in
    the license fees in the year 1996 and that was the subject matter
    of challenge in Writ Petition No.735 of 1997. There was again a
    revision in license fees in the year 2003 to the extent of about

    2 Yog Advertising and Marketing Services & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater
    Mumbai & Anr.
    2016 SCC OnLine Bom. 62
    3
    Panchal

    SPONSORED

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    100% in the schedule of fees and that continued for about five
    years. Thereafter, a new guidelines for exhibiting sign boards and
    hoardings became operational on 10 th January 2008 and the High
    Court passed an order in Writ Petition No.1132 of 2002 directing
    the Municipal Corporation to implement the new guidelines which
    entailed a complete study of the existing hoardings and about 225
    hoardings were removed and 485 licenses were revoked. Since the
    last increase in the schedule of fees, there has been substantial
    increase in the expenditure of various departments of the
    Municipal Corporation. Similarly, there has been increase in the
    wholesale price index and costs of services which necessitated
    increase in the license fees and an annual increase by 10%. The
    Municipal Corporation has emphatically denied that there was no
    rationale for increase in the license fees and states as under: –

    “14. I deny that the rationale given by the Corporation for the
    increase in the fee is incorrect. The decline in the revenues ought to
    be considered as compared to the expenditure of the various
    departments of the Corporation, the increase in the wholesale price
    index, the growing expenditure and the various services rendered.
    The comparison of the expenditure only towards the operative
    functioning of the license department from the revenue of the
    hoardings is misconceived and erroneous. Considering the increase
    in the license fees by 100% after a gap of 6 years and an annual
    increase of 10% can be no stretch of imagination and logical
    reasoning be considered to be unreasonable and unjustified. The cost
    of administering the municipal services has also increased year to
    year. In the year 2003-04, the cost of administering municipal
    services was 5366.26 Cr. In 2007-08, it was 10585 Cr. It recites
    that the cost of living has been rapidly increasing. The value of
    Rupee has also gone down substantially. Whilst the Petitioners
    earned substantial revenue from the hoardings that the Corporation
    believes substantially increased over the years, the hoarding owners
    are grudging a reasonable justified increase in the license fee
    charged by the Corporation. I deny that there is any
    unreasonableness in the Resolution dated 11 th December 2009 or
    that the same, in any manner, is excessive or harsh.”

    4. Mr. Navroz Seervai, the learned senior counsel for the
    petitioners submitted that sub-section (2) to section 479 confers
    an unguided, uncanalized and arbitrary powers on the

    4
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    Commissioner for levying license fees on sky-signs and
    advertisements, and the delegation of such arbitrary powers on
    the Municipal Commissioner shall be an infraction of Article 14 of
    the Constitution. There is no policy laid down by the Legislature
    and no standard has been set down for guidance of the
    Commissioner to fix the rates of license fees and the manifest
    arbitrariness in conferring such unguided powers on the
    Commissioner cannot be covered up on the ground of a dormant
    or latent legislative policy. The Legislature must set limits of the
    power delegated by law through a clear guidance for those on
    whom the power to execute law has been conferred [per, “Kishan
    Prakash Sharma”3]. The learned senior counsel referred to “Devi
    Das Gopal Krishnan”4 and further submitted that the Legislature
    cannot efface itself in the matter of fixation of rates without giving
    any guidance. Rather, the Legislature must provide guidance for
    fixation of the rates of taxes when power to fix such rates is left to
    a body or authority and such guidance must flow from the statute
    [per, “Liberty Cinema”5]. It is no safeguard in the matter of fixation
    of the rate of license fees that the Municipal Corporation
    supervises the acts of the Commissioner. The impugned resolution
    does not provide any indication as to how the Municipal
    Corporation approved the proposal for increase in the license fees
    and the impugned resolution was passed mechanically without
    any application of mind.

    5. Per contra, Dr. Birendra Saraf, the learned Advocate General
    submitted that Article 243-X is an enabling provision and it does
    not mandatorily require the Legislature of a State to enact a law
    authorizing the Municipality to levy, collect and appropriate taxes,
    3 Kishan Prakash Sharma & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.🙁2001) 5 SCC 212
    4 Devi Das Gopal Krishnan v. State of Punjab:1967
    SCC OnLine SC 108
    5 Corporation of Calcatta & Anr. v. Liberty Cinema:1964 SCC OnLine SC 65
    5
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    duties, tolls or fees. There are certain provisions in Part IX-A of the
    Constitution of India such as Article 243-Q, Article 243-R, Article
    243-S
    , Article 243-T, Article 243-U, Article 243-V, Article 243-ZA,
    Article 243-ZD and Article 243-ZF which are mandatory
    provisions. Whereas, Article 243-W and Article 243-X wherein the
    expression “the State Legislature may” has been used are the
    enabling provisions. It is the ordinary rule of interpretation that
    the word “may” is used to grant a discretion and not to impose a
    mandatory direction and no special circumstance has been shown
    by the petitioners to infer a mandatory direction in clause (a) of
    Article 243-X to the State Legislature to enact a law providing the
    procedure and limits to levy, collect and appropriate taxes, duties,
    tolls and fees [per, “Sahodara Devi”6]. Clause (a) of Article 243-X
    does not in any manner suggest that the Legislature of a State is
    under any obligation to lay down a procedure or to provide limits
    in the statute which authorizes the Municipality to collect license
    fees. The learned Advocate General further contended that the use
    of expression “as may be prescribed” leaves a discretion with the
    State Legislature to specify the procedure or limits for levying or
    collecting fees [per,”Orient Paper Mills”7]. Supporting him,
    Mr.Suresh B. Pakale, the learned senior counsel for the Municipal
    Corporation submitted that the license fees levied and collected by
    the Municipal Corporation can be in return for the services
    rendered by it, to defray the costs of administration and to
    increase the general funds of the Municipal Corporation.

    6. At the outset, we may indicate that the objection raised by
    the respondents on the ground of delay and laches in raising the
    question of constitutional validity of sub section (2) to section 479

    6 Sahodara Devi (Smt) & Ors. v. Govt. of India & Anr.🙁1972) 3 SCC 156
    7 Orissa State (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Board v. Orient Paper Mills & Anr.
    :

    (2003)10 SCC 421
    6
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    of the MMC Act was rejected at the initial stage of hearing of this
    writ petition. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court rejected the
    technical objection based on the principles of constructive res
    judicata by referring to the decision in “Amalgamated Coalfields
    Ltd.8, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the
    constructive res judicata being special and artificial form of res
    judicata is generally not applied to writ proceedings under Article
    32
    or Article 226 of the Constitution. This Court further held that
    the writ petition may not be rejected on the ground of delay and
    laches wherever an infraction of the fundamental right is alleged
    qua a challenge to an enactment or its provision. The co-ordinate
    Bench referred to “Basheshar Nath9, Olga Tellis10 and “Re : Kerala
    Education Bill”11 and held that there can be no waiver of
    fundamental rights and a citizen cannot be said to have lost his
    fundamental rights on the ground that it was not exercised for a
    long time or not at all. Furthermore, the writ petition cannot be
    dismissed on the ground that the aggrieved party had been paying
    the tax without objection for years. The real test to determine
    whether a writ petition may not be entertained on the ground of
    delay is whether any parallel right was created in the meantime
    and the lapse of time is not attributable to any laches or
    negligence on the part of aggrieved party.

    7. The question posed is whether section 479 of the MMC Act,
    which provides as under, suffers from excessive delegation:

    “479. Licences and written permissions to specify condition
    etc., on which they are granted.–

    (1) Whenever it is provided in this Act that a licence or a written

    8 Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. & Anr. v Janpada Sabha, Chhindwara & Ors.:1962
    SCC OnLine SC 72
    9 Basheshar Nath v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi & Rajasthan & Anr.: 1958
    SCC OnLine SC 7
    10 Olga Tellis & Ors. v. Bombay Municipal Corporation & Ors.:1985
    (3) SCC 545
    11 Re : The Kerala education Bill :1957 AIR 1958 SC 956
    7
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    permission may be given for any purpose, such licence or written
    permission shall specify the period for which, and the restrictions
    and conditions subject to which, the same is granted, and shall be
    given under the signature of the Commissioner or of a municipal
    officer empowered under section 68 to grant the same.
    (2) Fees to be chargeable.– For every such licence or written
    permission a fee may be charged at such rate as shall from time to
    time be fixed by the 1 [Commissioner], with the sanction of the
    Corporation.

    (3) Licences and written permissions may be revoked, etc.–
    Subject to the provisions of 2 [clauses (d) and (dd)] of section 403,
    any licence or written permission granted under this Act may at any
    time be suspended or revoked by the Commissioner, if any of its
    restrictions or conditions is infringed or evaded by the person to
    whom the same has been granted, or if the said person is convicted
    of an infringment of any of the provisions of this Act or of any
    regulation or by-law made hereunder in any matter to which such
    licence or permission relates.

    (4) When licence or written permission is revoked, etc.,
    grantee to be deemed to be without a licence or written
    permission.– When any such licence or written permission is
    suspended or revoked or when the period for which the same was
    granted has expired the person to whom the same was granted
    shall for all purposes of this Act, be deemed to be without a licence
    or written permission until the Commissioner’s order for suspending
    or revoking the licence or written permission is cancelled by him or
    until the licence or written permission is renewed, as the case may
    be.

    (5) Grantees to be bound to produce licence or written
    permission.– Every person to whom any such licence or written
    permission has been granted shall at all reasonable times while
    such written permission or licence remains in force, if so required by
    the Commissioner produce such licence or written permission.”

    8. In the context of the challenge to sub-section (2) to section
    479
    of the MMC Act, it is necessary to examine the ambit and
    scope of Article 243-X which is reproduced as under :-

    “243X. Power to impose taxes by, and Funds of, the
    Municipalities.–

    The Legislature of a State may, by law,–

    (a) authorise a Municipality to levy, collect and appropriate such
    taxes, duties, tolls and fees in accordance with such procedure and
    subject to such limits;

    (b) assign to a Municipality such taxes, duties, tolls and fees
    levied and collected by the State Government for such purposes and

    8
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    subject to such conditions and limits;

    (c) provide for making such grants-in-aid to the Municipalities
    from the Consolidated Fund of the State; and

    (d) provide for constitution of such Funds for crediting all moneys
    received, respectively, by or on behalf of the Municipalities and also
    for the withdrawal of such moneys therefrom,
    as may be specified in the law.”

    9. The Legislature of a State has wide powers to make laws. It
    has multiple duties under the Constitution but the Legislature in
    a welfare State cannot presumably conceive and contemplate all
    the details while formulating a particular legislative policy. It may
    enact a law to delegate its subsidiary or ancillary powers for
    carrying out the policy laid down in the statute. Therefore, the
    Legislature can reserve in itself the final control over subordinate
    legislation and delegate the ancillary powers of working out the
    details for executing the legislative policy. This is also no longer in
    the realm of doubt that the power to fix the rates of taxes and fees
    may be legitimately left to the executive. In “Harishankar Bagla”12,
    the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the Legislature must declare
    the policy of the law and the legal principles which are to control
    any given case and must provide a standard to guide the officials
    or the body in power to execute the law. The Hon’ble Supreme
    Court further held that the statements in the preamble to the Act
    may provide sufficient indication as to the legislative
    policy.”Vasantlal Maganbhai Sanjanwala”13 also clearly recognized
    the necessity and need to delegate subsidiary or ancillary powers
    to the delegates for carrying out the legislative policy laid down by
    the Legislature in the statute. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held
    that the inquiry whether the impugned delegation involves a
    delegation of essential legislative power should take into account

    12 Harishankar Bagla & Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh: (1954) 1 SCC 978
    13 Vasantlal Maganbhai Sanjanwala v. The State of Bombay & Ors.:1960
    SCC OnLine
    SC 27
    9
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    the statement in the preamble to the statute. The Court held that
    the statements made in the preamble itself would be sufficient to
    satisfy the requirements of the relevant tests if the statements
    made therein afford satisfactory basis for holding that the
    legislative policy and the principles have been enunciated in the
    preamble with sufficient accuracy and clarity. In such cases, the
    discretion can be left with the executive to determine the quantum
    of license fees and it shall not violate the provisions under Article
    243-X
    or for that matter any constitutional provision including
    Part-III of the Constitution.

    10. The Constitution (73rd Amendment) Act and Constitution
    (74th Amendment) Act infused a new life to the local self-bodies like
    the Panchayats and Municipalities which are constituted as the
    institutions of self-government. The object behind vesting certain
    powers and authority in the municipalities is to enable them to
    function as the institutions of self-government. Article 243-W
    envisages that the law made by the Legislature of a State may
    contain provisions for devolution of powers and responsibilities
    upon the Municipalities. The State Legislatures have enacted laws
    and made provisions for devolution of powers upon the
    Panchayats and the Municipalities for the social and economic
    development of the rural and urban areas. The functions of the
    Municipalities are, therefore, necessary to be borne in mind while
    interpreting the laws enacted by a State. The Mumbai Municipal
    Corporation Act, 1888
    was enacted to replace the Bombay
    Municipal Act, 1872 which was amended in the year 1878 to
    regulate the municipal administration of the City of Bombay. The
    statement of objects and reasons appended to the Bill to enact the
    Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 records that the MMC
    Act
    consolidates the existing Municipal laws. The object was to
    10
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    recast, to amend and to expand the provisions of the Bombay
    Municipal Acts, 1872 and 1878. At that time, there were nine
    minor enactments and other local statutes which dealt with the
    matters affecting the Municipal governance in the city. Except
    retaining certain parts of such enactments with necessary
    modifications, expansions and improvements, all those
    enactments were repealed. It is further indicated that the long
    experience of the working of the existing laws and other
    enactments in force elsewhere were taken into consideration to
    supply sufficient powers to the Commissioner for carrying out and
    enforcing such measures under the MMC Act as are necessary for
    achieving the object. The past experience also supported the
    wisdom of centering all authority and responsibility for executive
    action in the Municipal Corporation.

    11. The Municipal bodies need flexibility to raise funds as per
    their budgetary needs and that may provide enough guidance and
    the delegation of taxing power cannot be held excessive or
    unconstitutional. In “George Walkem Shannon”14, the Privy
    Council rendered its opinion that the fees should be charged in
    order either to defray the costs of administering the local
    regulation or to increase the general funds of the province or for
    both purposes. If a levy is imposed with a view to provide a
    specific service and to recover expenses for maintaining the
    services then that would be in the nature of a fees and not a tax. 15
    In case of fees, the Government may do some positive work for the
    benefit of the persons but the fee is not always a return for the
    work done or services rendered. In “Liberty Cinema” it was held

    14 George Walkem Shannon & Ors. v. Lower Mainland Dairy Products Board & Anr:

    1938 SCC OnLine PC 52

    15 H. H. Sudhundra Thirtha Swamiar & Ors. v. Commissioner for Hindu Religious &
    Charitable Endowments, Mysore & Anr.:1962 SCC OnLine SC 188
    11
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    that the word “fee” is sometimes used loosely and it is not always
    that fees can be charged only for the services. In that case, the
    Corporation of Calcutta was not required to provide any specific
    services to the cinema houses and levy of the fees was in reality a
    tax. It was held that as long as a local body has a budget and
    needs to raise funds, delegation of taxing power shall be valid
    even without providing a maximum limit. The Hon’ble Supreme
    Court further indicated that the fees for license and the fees for
    services rendered are two different kinds of levy contemplated in
    the Constitution. The fees for license cannot be equated with fees
    for services rendered and this is apparent on a bare reading of
    Articles 110(2) and 199(2) of the Constitution of India. This is an
    admitted position that the license fees charged by the
    Commissioner for granting advertisement permissions is a fee and
    not in the nature of a tax imposed in the guise of fees. Therefore,
    the general principles for examining the validity of the delegation
    of power to impose a tax or to fix the rates of taxes cannot be
    applied in this case.

    12. Mr. Navroz Seervai, the learned senior counsel for the
    petitioners contended that the law enacted by the State
    Legislature authorizing a Municipality to collect appropriate
    taxes, duties, tolls and fees must lay down a procedure for
    collection and appropriation of such taxes etc. and must also
    provide such limits on the quantum of license fees that can be
    fixed over a given period of time. He contended that the word
    “procedure” for determination of the license fees and the word
    “limits” for fixing the quantum of the license fees must be given
    its full effect as no word or words in a statutory provision can be
    treated as superfluous [per, “Mithilesh Singh”16]. In our opinion,
    16 Mithilesh Singh v. Union of India & Ors.:(2003) 3 SCC 309
    12
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    it is however not correct to say that the Legislature of a State
    when decides to enact a law authorizing a Municipality to levy,
    collect and appropriate the license fees then it must specify a
    procedure and the limits to the license fees. There is no
    requirement in law to provide minimum or maximum rate of
    license fees and the power conferred on the Commissioner is not
    unguided or arbitrary. A delegation of power to fix the rate of
    license fees is not open to challenge on the ground that no
    procedure or limits has been provided. In “The Western India
    Theatres Ltd.17”, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the
    authorization to the Municipality to impose taxes for the
    purposes of Act shall furnish sufficient guidance for imposition of
    tax. In “Delhi Race Club Limited”18, the Hon’ble Supreme Court
    held that if there is some legislative policy for fixation of the rate
    of fees that by itself shall provide sufficient guidance to the
    delegate. The test whether any guidance, check, control or
    safeguard has been provided in the statute shall apply only to the
    cases of delegation of the fixation of rate of tax and not of the
    fees. It is also well settled that what should be the form of
    guidance that the legislative policy should lay down can be
    gathered from the preamble, object and reasons and the
    provisions of the statute.

    13. The majority judgment in “Vasantlal Maganbhai
    Sanjanwala” which upheld section 6(2) of the Bombay Tenancy &
    Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 held that there was a legislative
    policy laid down by the Act in its preamble and relevant sections
    and that provided sufficient guidance to the government to fix a
    lower rate of maximum rents payable by the tenant in any
    17 The Western India Theatres Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Poona:1959
    SCC OnLine SC 28
    18 Delhi Race Club Limited v. Union of India & Ors.: (2012) 8 SCC 680.

    13

    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    particular area. The decision in “Krishna Mohan (P) Ltd.”19 deals
    with an entirely different fact situation and the power to fix the
    rate of license fees did not arise in that case. Similarly, the
    decision in “Kishan Prakash Sharma” was rendered in the context
    of the delegation of powers to frame general scheme for re-
    organization of the insurance business. Pertinently, this decision
    provides a valuable guideline and lays down the test for the
    validity of the delegated legislation. This decision held that if the
    preamble of the statute, the background facts leading to
    enactment of the statute, history of the legislation, complexity of
    the problems etc. provide guidelines then a particular legislation
    must be upheld. The provisions relating to imposition of tax are
    definitely guided by different considerations and the decision in
    “Devi Das Gopal Krishnan”, which dealt with the amendment to
    section 5 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 do not avail
    any help to the petitioners. In “Kandivali Co-Operative Industrial
    Estate”20, there was a 10% increase every year in the Trade Refuse
    Charges (TRC) which was held arbitrary and without any
    guidelines and the Corporation was directed not to recover the
    TRC at the hiked rate from the year 2009 without giving
    reasonable opportunity of hearing to the licensee or the persons
    liable to pay such increased TRC. The case projected by the
    aggrieved parties was that they did not generate any TRC and they
    were not liable to levy of the TRC upon them. The Hon’ble
    Supreme Court held that the Legislature can delegate its power to
    the statutory authority to levy tax or fees and fix the rates and the
    delegation of such power to the local body without providing a
    maximum rate of tax or fees does not by itself may render the

    19 Krishna Mohan (P) Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.: (2003) 7 SCC 151.
    20 Kandivali Co-Operative Industrial Estate & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater
    Mumbai & Ors.
    : (2015) 11 SCC 161
    14
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    delegation excessive or invalid.

    14. Mr. Navroz Seervai, the learned senior counsel next
    contended that the law made by the Legislature of a State vesting
    such powers and authority in the Municipalities as may be
    necessary to enable them to function as the institutions of self-
    government shall be subject to other provisions of the
    Constitution. In “Shanti G. Patel & Ors.”21, the Hon’ble Supreme
    Court held that Article 243-W of the Constitution of India is an
    enabling provision under which the State Legislature may endow
    by law the Municipality with such powers and authority, as may
    be necessary, to function as an institution of self government. In
    “Shanti G. Patel” the Constitutional validity of section 37(1-AA) of
    the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 was
    called into question on the ground that the Municipal Corporation
    was alone competent to make subordinate legislation as regards
    the town planning. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the State
    Legislature is not obliged to provide for a law empowering the
    Municipality with powers and authority to levy tax, toll fees etc.
    under Article 243-W of the Constitution of India. We are of the
    definite opinion that expression “subject to the provisions of this
    Constitution” puts a bar on the power of Legislature of a State to
    make law endowing the Municipalities such powers and authority
    which should not impinge upon the powers of other institutions or
    authority as to the matters enumerated under Article 243-W of the
    Constitution. The heading “Powers, authority and responsibilities
    of Municipalities, etc.” of Article 243-W of the Constitution of India
    makes it very explicit and provides as under:-

    “Article 243-W. Powers, authority and responsibilities of
    Municipalities, etc.-

    21 Shanti G. Patel & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.: (2006) 2 SCC 505,
    15
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Legislature of a
    State may, by law, endow-

    (a) the Municipalities with such powers and authority as
    may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of
    self-government and such law may contain provisions for the
    devolution of powers and responsibilities upon Municipalities,
    subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, with
    respect to-

                     (i)      The preparation of plans for economic development
                     and       and social justice;
    

    (ii) The performance of functions and the implementation
    of schemes as may be entrusted to them including those in
    relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule;

    (b) the Committees with such powers and authority as
    may be necessary to enable them to carry out the
    responsibilities conferred upon them including those in
    relation to the matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule.”

    15. Except to the extent that the law made by the Legislature of
    a State must be in consonance with the constitutional mandate
    under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, we do not find
    any force in the aforesaid submission. The power to make a law to
    authorize a municipality to levy, collect and appropriate taxes,
    duties, tolls and fees under Article 243-X is subject to the
    limitations as afore-mentioned and nothing more. The
    Constitution (74th Amendment) Act does not contemplate that the
    existing laws would become non-operative and a vacuum would be
    created in the matter of enforcement of the existing laws. Article
    243-X
    cannot be read in isolation and sub-section (2) to section
    479
    is not ultra vires to Article 243-X. The MMC Act has been in
    existence much prior to 74th amendment and any attack on the
    constitutionality of any provision thereof must be considered with
    special caution. Sub-section (2) to section 479 of the MMC Act is
    not inconsistent or repugnant with Article 243-X or any part of the
    Constitution and Article 243-ZF has no application to the MMC
    Act
    . The MMC Act is a pre-Constitution enactment and no
    provision thereof is inconsistent with Part-III of the Constitution of
    16
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    India. The power conferred under sub-section (2) on the
    Commissioner to fix the license fees is not at all an unguided
    power and there are sufficient guidelines and safeguards for fixing
    of the license fees. We do not agree with Mr. Navroz Seervai, the
    learned senior counsel that no policy or principle has been
    enunciated by the Legislature and no guidance is provided to the
    Commissioner to fix the license fees.

    16. There are two facets of an impost of the license fees. License
    fees can be regulatory or the fees for services. The license fees can
    be regulatory when the activities for which a license is given
    require to be regulated or controlled and an element of quid pro
    quo for the levy of such fees is not required [vide,”Secunderabad
    Hyderabad Hotel Owners’ Association & Ors.” 22]. The Municipal
    Corporation has to perform multiple task and provide a variety of
    services. But the fees in every services provided by the Municipal
    Corporation cannot be determined with mathematical exactitude.
    In “Avinder Singh23, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the
    Legislature can impose multiple taxes under different entries in
    the Constitution. For example; a bottle of liquor can be subjected
    to excise duty as well as a tax and also municipal tax. In “Pandit
    Banarsi Das Bhanot”24, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the
    delegation of power to the executive to identify the persons on
    whom tax is to be levied or to decide the rates of tax to be charged
    on different class of goods or other ancillary subjects shall be a
    valid delegation so long as the Legislature retains or has the power
    of withdrawing or altering the power to tax. In “Sreenivasa General

    22 Secunderabad Hyderabad Hotel Owners’ Association & Ors. v. Hyderabad
    Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad & Anr.
    : (1999) 2 SCC 274.
    23 Avinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.: (1979) 1 SCC 137
    24 Pandit Banarsi Das Bhanot & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
    1958 SCC
    OnLine SC 25
    17
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    Traders”25, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the co-
    relationship between the levy and the services rendered (sic or)
    expected is one of general character and not of mathematical
    exactitude and all that is necessary is that there should be a
    ‘reasonable relationship’ between the levy of the fees and the
    services rendered. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under :-

    “7. It is not always possible to work out with mathematical precision
    the amount of fee required for the services to be rendered each year
    and to collect only just that amount which is sufficient for meeting
    the expenditure in that year. In some years, the income of a market
    committee by way of market fee and licence fee may exceed the
    expenditure and in another year when the development works are in
    progress for providing modern infrastructure facilities, the
    expenditure may be far in excess of the income. It is wrong to take
    only one particular year or a few years into consideration to decide
    whether the fee is commensurate with the services rendered. An
    overall picture has to be taken in dealing with the question whether
    there is quid pro quo i.e. there is correlation between the increase in
    the rate of fee from 50 paise to rupee one and the services
    rendered.”

    17. In “Yog Advertising and Marketing Services” the Division
    Bench of this Court held that there is a direct co-relation between
    the license fees and the services rendered and the proposed 10%
    annual increase in the license fees was justified. The surplus
    funds or the quantum of collection of license fees has no
    co-relation with the license fees for the advertisement promotions.
    It is not necessary that the services rendered out of the fees
    collected should be directly in proportion to the amount of fees
    collected or the services rendered in lieu of the fees collected
    should confine to the persons from whom the fees has been
    collected [vide, “Kesoram Industries Ltd.”26]. In paragraph no.146
    of the reported judgment the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as

    25 Sreenivasa General Traders & Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.: (1983) 4 SCC

    353.
    26 State of W.B. v. Kesoram Industries Ltd. & Ors.: (2004) 10 SCC 201.

    18

    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    under :-

    “146. ……… It is not necessary that the services rendered from out
    of the fee collected should be directly in proportion with the amount
    of fee collected. It is equally not necessary that the services
    rendered by the fee collected should remain confined to the persons
    from whom the fee has been collected. Availability of indirect benefit
    and a general nexus between the persons bearing the burden of
    levy of fee and the services rendered out of the fee collected is
    enough to uphold the validity of the fee charged. The levy of the
    impugned cess can equally be upheld by reference to Entry 66 read
    with Entry 5 of List II.”

    18. The process of regulation and licensing of the hoardings,
    sky-signs and advertisements is not simple. It involves the officers
    at ward level and co-ordination between different departments.
    The municipal authorities including the Commissioner are
    charged with the duty to carry out the provisions of the MMC Act.
    The duties and powers of the municipal authorities are set out in
    different provisions of the MMC Act. The power to fix the license
    fees is exercised by the Commissioner while granting written
    permission to erect, fix or retain any sky-sign, advertisement etc.

    19. Section 328 of the MMC Act regulates the sky-signs to the
    extent that a written permission of the Municipal Corporation is
    necessary to erect, fix or retain any sky-sign and such written
    permission shall not exceed two years from the date of permission
    or renewal so granted. It further provides that the Commissioner
    shall cause a scrutiny of the sky-sign which is in the form of a
    poster depicting any scene from a cinematographic film, stage play
    or other stage performance and he shall grant permission only if
    he is satisfied that the erection or fixing of such poster is not likely
    to offend against decency or morality. Similarly, the regulation and
    control of the advertisements vest with the Commissioner under
    section 328A of the MMC Act who may grant written permission to

    19
    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    erect, exhibit, fix or retain any advertisement upon any land,
    building wall, hoarding or structure. There are policy guidelines
    on the grant of permission for the display of sky-signs and
    advertisements. The last edition of such policy guidelines was
    issued on 10th January 2008. It is stated that there was a need for
    further regulation because of the complaints by the residents
    about (a) screening of light and ventilation by the residents due to
    discriminate erection of hoardings (b) dispute among the housing
    society members (c) dispute raised by the landlords of the building
    who claimed that they were not aware of the permission to the
    Agency (d) clandestine cutting of trees for the better visibility of
    the advertisement (e) hoardings causing obstruction to the
    visibility of other advertisements and other issues connected
    therewith. The area falling within the limits of Municipal
    Corporation has been divided into three zones and each zone
    consists of different wards. The standard sizes of the hoardings for
    each zone have been provided. It is further provided that tenders
    shall be invited whenever required by the Corporation for tri-vision
    backlit boards having certain size for the footpath with minimum
    width size of 15 feet on selected roads. This is also provided that
    the advertiser shall have to pay additional charges/premium as
    decided by the Commissioner for the backlit advertisement boards
    on BEST bus queue shelters.

    20. There is a new guidelines under which several measures are
    indicated. A provision has been made for prohibiting the
    advertisement on moving vehicles, transfer of sign-boards on
    municipal lands and not to permit sign-boards on first search
    basis. There are several items under the license fees schedule
    which were excluded from the revised fees schedule. The various
    regulations relating to the advertisements, hoarding boards, sky-

    20

    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    signs etc. shall be part of the procedure for levying fees by the
    Commissioner. The policy guidelines provide the permissible
    colours of advertisement, bottom clearance of the hoarding board,
    maximum height of the hoarding board, minimum distance
    between two hoarding boards, alignment of hoardings, clubbing of
    hoardings, projection of hoardings etc. In our opinion, the
    parameters laid down thereunder shall provide sufficient
    guidelines to the Commissioner to adopt a procedure for levying
    the fees. There is a format of the application form under appendix
    “A” which requires definite information such as medium of
    advertisements applied for; illuminated and non-illuminated form
    of advertisement; temporary and non-temporary; application made
    by a charitable Trust-Institutions for display of free banner
    academic/religious/public awareness/health political and other
    purposes, name of ward offices, dimensions in length, width,
    height etc. and site location. Pertinently, Annexure-II appended to
    the guidelines provides the schedule of fees for advertisement
    permits issued under section 328 and 328A of the MMC Act for
    the advertisements under the business and non-business
    categories. We further find that Annexure-II provides the scale of
    fees and the rates of fees under different category. For the sake of
    clarity, we may reproduce a part of Annexure-II as under:

    ANNEXURE-II
    Group ‘A’ Advertisement other than Business Premises

    Sr. Description Scale of licence Rates of fees in Rs. Rates of
    No. fees (p.m.) fees in
    Rs.

                                                                                           (p.m.)
                                                                  A           B          Propose
                                                              Category     Categor           d
                                                              for Zone       y for
                                                              H1 & H2      Zone H3
      1. a) Illuminated      i) For a space                     300          230             --
            Advertisement on    upto 1 sq. mt.
    
                                                    21
    Panchal
    
    
    
           ::: Uploaded on - 07/04/2026                          ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
                                                                                   WP-227-2027.doc
    
             hoardings        or
             board/wall          ii)      For every          230           160            --
             paintings        or additional 1
             balloon or in the      sq.mt. or part
             form of sky sign       thereof
             and illuminated
             hoardings        or
             boards on vehicle
          b) Illuminated         i) For a space              450           350            --
             advertisement by        upto 1 sq.mt.
             means of            ii) For additional          320           240            --
             computerized            1 sq.mt. or
             coloured/multi          part thereof.
             coloured graphic
             tricycle moving
             electronic display
             system.
          c) For display of                --                --              --         1/6 of
             pictorial                                                                admissi
             advertisement                                                                ble
                                                                                      illumina
                                                                                          ted
                                                                                      advertis
                                                                                        ement
                                                                                         fees
         d) Non-illuminated             i) For a space       120            90             --
            Advertisement on               upto 1 sq.mt.
            hoardings or                                                                  --
            board/wall                  ii) For every                                     --
            paintings or                    additional 1     70             54            --
            balloon or in the               sq.mt. or less
            form sky sign
            and non-
            illuminated
            hoardings or
            boards on
            vehicle.
         e) Advertisement               i) For a space       --              --           90
            fixed or                        upto 1 sq.mt.    --              --
            suspended in                ii) For every
            streets and or                  additional 1                                  54
            footpath (such as               sq.mt. or less
            cloth banners
            etc.) (Non-
            illuminated)
      2. Advertisement       on                  -                                    As per
          Auto Rickshaws &                                                            C.R.No.
          Taxies                                                                      42 dtd.
                                                                                      21/06/
                                                                                      02 the
                                                                                      has
                                                                                      been
    
                                                     22
    Panchal
    
    
    
         ::: Uploaded on - 07/04/2026                         ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
                                                                                  WP-227-2027.doc
    
                                                                                     revised
              i) For     illuminated i) For a space          --             --       350
                  advertisement          upto 1 sq.mt.
                  boards.            ii) For                 --             --       350
                                         additional 1
                                         sq.mt.
              ii) For           non- i) For a space          --             --       170
                  illuminated            upto 1 sq.mt.
                  advertisement      ii) For                 --             --       170
                  boards                 additional 1
                                         sq. mt.
      3.      Temporary                      --              --             --       150% of
              advertisement                                                          monthly
              permit issued for                                                      normal
              commercial purpose.                                                    fees
      4.      Ground Rent as per             --          Rs.500/-      Rs.250/       As per
              guideline No.17B for                       per sq.ft.      - per       C.R.
              First           Finder                       P.A.         sq.ft.       No.1370
              Scheme.                                                    P.A.        dtd.
              (Hoardings          on                                                 30/07/
              Municipal                                                              2001
              properties)                                                            the fees
                                                                                     has
                                                                                     been
                                                                                     revised
      5.      As per guideline              --
              17C Ground Rent
              for hoardings on
              Municipal footpath.
              (Only projection)
      A)      1)          Projected         --               --             --        15000
              advertisement                                                            P.A.
              boards upto 3 fts.
              (running foot) on
              Municipal footpath.
              2) More than 3 fts.           --               --             --        25000
              & upto 5 fts.                                                            P.A.
              3) More than 5 fts.           --               --             --        40000
              & upto 7.5 fts.                                                          P.A.
     B)       1) For the portion 1          --               --             --        20000
              ft. width & 20 fts.                                                      P.A.
              Length      projected
              parallel           on
              Municipal footpath.
              2) For the portion 1          --               --             --        40000
              ft. width & length                                                       P.A.
              more than 20 fts.
              Upto 40 fts.
              3) For the portion 1          --               --             --        30000
              ft. & 2.5 fts. width                                                     P.A.
              & upto 20 fts.
              Length
    
                                                 23
    Panchal
    
    
    
           ::: Uploaded on - 07/04/2026                      ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
                                                                                     WP-227-2027.doc
    
              4) For the portion 1               --             --             --        60000
              ft. & 2.5 fts. width                                                        P.A.
              & length more than
              20 fts. Upto 40 fts.
    

    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Group ‘B’ advertisement on Business Premises
    1. Non-illuminated i) For a space upto 1 70 55
    advertisement forming sq.mt.

    sky signs. ii) For every additional 50 35

                                          sq.mt.     or     part
                                          thereof.
     2.       For illuminated name i) For a space upto 1         180                       140
              boards sky signs, Glow      sq.mt.
              Signs & Neon Sign ii) For every additional         150                       120
              illuminated        show     sq.mt. or part thereof
              cases, show rooms etc.
     3.       Transfer of permits
                  a) To legal heirs                                                         500
                  b) To other than                                                         2000
                     legal heirs
    
    

    21. There is a reference of the previous resolution of the
    Municipal Corporation dated 10th September 2004 with reference
    to which the revised rate schedule was determined for certain
    categories. There is a foundation laid for increase in license fees
    by 80 percent for one year and then an increase by 10 percent for
    the further years. It is stated in the proposal moved by the
    Commissioner that there was increase in the cost of
    establishment, service charges and cost of other services provided
    by the Municipal Corporation in the last several years after the
    last rate schedule was approved on 13 th January 2003. However,
    in view of the decision in “Yog Advertising and Marketing Services”,
    we need not further elaborate upon the submissions made by Mr.
    Navroz Seervai, the learned senior counsel that the increase in
    licence fees @ 10% p.a. is excessive or arbitrary. Sub section (2) of
    Section 479 of the MMC Act is valid and does not suffer from vice
    of excessive delegation and is intra-vires to the Constitution of
    India.

    24

    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    22. Mr. Navroz Seervai, the learned senior counsel submitted
    that a provision requiring the sanction of the Municipal
    Corporation on the rates fixed by the Commissioner is not an
    effective measure or safeguard for fixation of the license fees as
    the Municipal Corporation itself shall be deemed to have been
    exercising its executive power and not the legislative power. The
    Municipal Corporation is conceived under section 5 as the body
    corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal. It
    consists of 227 Councillors directly elected at ward election and
    10 nominated Councillors having special knowledge and
    experience in municipal administration. The Municipal
    Corporation which consists of the persons who themselves shall
    be required to pay license fees shall definitely exercise greater
    control over the power of the Commissioner to levy license fees.
    Dr. Birendra Saraf, the learned Advocate General referred to the
    decision in “Birla Cotton, Spinning and Weaving Mills, Delhi” 27 and
    contended that this is an important circumstance that the
    Municipal Corporation is an elected body and responsible and
    answerable to the people. In our opinion, it is not correct to say
    that the Municipal Corporation cannot exercise an effective control
    and supervision over the exercise of powers by the Commissioner
    under sub-section (2) to section 479 of the MMC Act. There is an
    inherent democratic check on the exercise of powers by the
    Commissioner. The Municipal Corporation is a representative
    body and it takes decision on behalf of the public. The impugned
    resolution was examined by the representative body in Municipal
    Corporation and its decision symbolizes a good faith.

    27 Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Birla Cotton, Spinning and Weaving Mills, Delhi &
    Anr.
    : 1968 SCC OnLine SC 13.

    25

    Panchal

    ::: Uploaded on – 07/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
    WP-227-2027.doc

    23. In view of the aforesaid discussion, Writ Petition No.227 of
    2017 is dismissed.

                                   [ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ]                       [ CHIEF JUSTICE ]
    
    
              Digitally signed
              by PRAVIN
    PRAVIN    DASHARATH
    DASHARATH PANDIT
    PANDIT    Date:
              2026.04.06
              23:55:37 +0530
    
    
    
    
                                                                      26
                                 Panchal
    
    
    
                                       ::: Uploaded on - 07/04/2026             ::: Downloaded on - 07/04/2026 20:40:45 :::
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here