MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND OTHERS versus MOHD. YASIN ETC.

Citation: [1983] 2 S.C.R. 999 · Decided: 28-04-1983 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.A. DESAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHf 
AND OTHERS 
v. 
MOHD. YASIN ETC. 
April 28, 1983 
(D. A. DESAI AND 0. CHINNAPPA REDDY, JJ.) 
999 
Tax and fee, contradistinction-Fees for slaughtering animals at slaughter 
houses enhanced by the Municipal Corporation, eightfold Legality of the enhance-
meni-Whether the enhanced fee for slaughterinu animals was wholly dispropor~ 
tionate to the cost of the services and supervision and the,.efore, not a fee, 
but a tax. 
As per the rates fixed in the year 1953 by the Municipal Corporation of 
:,Delhi, the slaughtering fees were 0.25 paise for each animal, in the case of 
sheep, goats and pigs and rupees one for each animal in the case of buffaloes. 
A 
B 
c 
By a Notification dated 31.1.1968, the Corporation purported to enhance the 
fi 
slaughtering fee in both the categories eightfold, with effect from February 1, 
1968. Some butchers of the city questioned the revision of rates on the ground 
that the proposed enhanced fee was wholly disproportionate to the cost of the 
.services and supervision and was in fact' not a fee, but a tax. 
During the pendency of the writ petitions in the High Court, by virtue 
of an interim arrangement, the appellant, was permitted· to collect slaughtering 
fees at double the rates fixed in 1953 and as a result thereof the Corporation 
realised a sum of Rs. 4,24,494/-. The budget Of the Coi::poration under item 
XIV-B showed a sum of Rs. 2,56,000 as the expenditure involved in connection 
with the slaughter houses. Comparing the amount of actual realisatioh of fee 
,at the rates permitted by the court with the an1ount of expenditure as revealed 
by the budget and excluding from consideration all expenditure not shown in 
the budget from item XIV B, the 1.J:igh Court came to the conclusion that even 
if the original fee was'doubled the amount realised would be more than suffi-
cient to meet the expenditure involved and, therefore, there was no reason 
at all for increasing the fee eightfold and so the proposed fee was no fee but_ a 
tax for which there is no legislative mandate. Hence the appeal by special 
leave. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1:1 The increase of the slaughtering fee from 0.25 p to Rs. 2.00 
per animal in the case of small animals and from rupee 1.00 to Rs. 8.00 in 
_.-L ,-
the case of large animals was wholly justified, in the circumstan<;es of the case. 
[1008 C-D] 
1:2 True, the Municipal Corporation has realised a sum of Rs. 4,24,494 
bf way of fees at the rate of Re. 00.50 per animal in the case of sheep, goats 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
1()1)6 
§UPREME cOURT REPoRTS 
(19MJ ~ S.C.R. 
and pigs and Rs. 21per animal in the case of buffalOfS, whereas the budget of 
the M.C.D. showed under item XIV-B that an amount of Rs. Z,56,000 was 
expended in connection with slaughter houses. The items of expenditure 
covered by item XIV-B of the Municipal Budget are evidently those items of 
cx~nditure which are incurred directly and exclusively in connection with 
slaughter houses. ,_.There al't' several other items of expenditure the whole or 
part of which is attributable to slaughter houses like the expenditure involved 
in the purchase, maintenance and the use of trucks and other vehicles for the 
removaJ of filth from slaughter houses, conservancy, petrol oil etc., the expendi-
ture incurred in connection with the maintenance of supervisory staff like a 
full time Veterih!lry Officer, Municipal Health Officer, Deputy Health Officer 
and Zonal Head Officers, the cost Of depreciation of the buildings and fittings 
in slatight~r houses, expansion and improvement of slaughter houses for utilities 
etc. but actually debited to other heads of account under the Municipal budget. 
Appatently, the High CdUrt was under an erroneous impression that the fees 
collected shdUld be shown to be related to expenditure incurred directly and 
exclusively in connection with the slaughtering of animals in its slaughter 
houses and also, shown as such in the Municipal budget. [1007 B-H, 1008 A-BJ 
2. Vicissitudes of time and necessitudes of history contribute to changes 
of philosophical attitudes, concepts, ideas and ideals and, with them, the mean 
ings of words and phrases and the language itself. The philosophy and 
the language of the law are no exceptions. Words and phrases take colour 
and character from the context and the times and speak differently in-different 
contexts and titnes. Words and phrases have not only a meaning but aJso a 
content, a lifin

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