KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL versus B. HEERA NAIK & ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2019] 17 S.C.R. 305 · Decided: 26-11-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN, M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
305
KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
v.
B. HEERA NAIK & ORS. ETC.
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 1734-1736 of 2019)
NOVEMBER 26, 2019
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: s.10
– Whether City Municipal Council is Department of Government
– Held: The City Municipal Council is a Council, incorporated
under s.10 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 – City and
Town Municipal Councils as per s.10 is “a body corporate” –
Similarly, under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976,
the Municipal Corporations are constituted as Corporation by
virtue of s.10 – The Municipal City Council and Municipal
Corporation, which have been created by State enactments are
controlled by the Government, which bodies also receive financial
assistance from the Government – It is well settled that Municipal
Corporations are instrumentality or agency of the Government –
The question is whether City Municipal Council constituted under
the Municipalities Act can be treated as Department of Government
– The first test to find out as to whether an institution is a
Corporation or a Department of the Government is to enquire
whether the undertaking functions as a responsible independent
organisation and not as part of any Department of the State; the
second test is whether it is endowed with the capacity to contract
obligations and of suing and being sued – The Scheme of
constitution of Municipal area and other provisions of Act, 1964
clearly indicate that Municipalities are not a Department of the
Government – The Constitution also envisages Municipality as a
body of self-Government – Thus, the provisions of the Act, 1964
and Act, 1974 makes it clear that City Municipal Council are not
to be treated as Department of the State Government – Karnataka
Municipalities Act, 1964 – Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act,
1976 – Municipalities – Constitution of India – Art.243P.
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: s.47,
48 – Prosecution of Municipal Commissioner of City Municipal
   [2019] 17 S.C.R. 305
305
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
306
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 17 S.C.R.
Council and Chief Officer of City Municipal Council – When an
offence is committed by City Municipal Council or Corporation,
whether they can be prosecuted under the Act, 1974 and what is
the procedure for initiating proceeding for prosecution of such
bodies – Held: s.47 contains a heading “offences by companies”
– The definition of company is contained in the Companies Act,
1956 in s.3 – The definition of company as contained in the
Companies Act, 1956 is clearly not borrowed in the expression of
company as used in s.47 of Act, 1974 – The company has been
defined in s.47 of Act, 1974 in a very wide and inclusive manner
– Explanation to s.47 states that “company” means “any body
corporate” – Thus, all body corporates are included within the
definition of company as per s.47 – There cannot be any dispute
that City Municipal Council is a body corporate, which has been
clearly provided under s.10 of Act, 1964 – Looking at the purpose
and object of the Act, s.47 can be resorted to for offences by body
corporate – s.49 embraces cognizance of all offences under the
Act – Whether the offences are covered by ss.47 or 48 has no
bearing on the power of the Court to take cognizance of an offence
– Karnataka State Pollution Control Board filed complaint for
taking cognizance specifically referring to s.49 of the Act, 1974 –
Thus, in event any offence is committed by anyone, its cognizance
can be taken under s.49 – However, offences by a body corporate
are to be covered by s.47, since in event offences by body
corporates are not covered by s.47, the benefit of s.47(1) proviso
shall not be available to those body corporates, which cannot be
the intention of the Legislature – Thus, offences by body corporate
like City Municipal Council are covered under s.49 treating it to
be offence as by company as provided in s.47 – Complaint against
Municipal Commissioner of City Municipal Council and Chief
Officer of City Municipal Council by appellant-Board was
maintainable – Companies Act, 1956 – s.3.
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974:
Legislative intent of enactment – The Act, 1974 was enacted by
the Parliament to provide for the prevention and control of water
pollution and the maintaining or restoring of wholesomeness of
water.
Municipalities: Duties of Municipal Council/Corporation –
Held: City Municipal 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.