SHAIK MADAR SABER AND ORS. ETC. versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

Citation: [1972] 2 S.C.R. 853 · Decided: 14-12-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.M. SIKRI · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

853 
A 
SHAIK MADAR SABER AND ORS. ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. 
December 14, 1971 
B 
[S. M. Snqu, C.J., J. M. SHELAT, I. D. DUA, H. R. KHANNA 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
AND G. K. MITTER, JI.) 
A1ulhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (5 of 1963), ss. 3 and 
17-lnterstate routes-Enhancement of tax-Validity. 
Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 301 and 304-Tax if should be 
reasonable and in public interest. 
Under s. 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963, 
the State Government is empowered by notification to direct that the tax 
should be levied on every motor vehicle used or kept for use in a public 
place in the State, •ubject to the maximum specified in the First Schedule. 
Sec;ion 17 of the Act vests in the State Government the power to amend 
the Schedules in the manner prescribed. 
In 1963, the State Government issued a notification increasing the 
taxes and, in 1968, the State Government amended tho First Schedule 
and increased the maximum tax payable and issued a notification direct-
ing the substitution of the higher rates. 
Both the increases were chal-
lenged by the appellants but the High Court dismissed the petitions. 
In appeal to this Court it was contended that : (I) the restrictions 
imposed by the tax were unreasonable having regard to Art. 19(1) (g) 
read with cl. (6) and A11. 301; (2) since part of the route lay outside 
the respondent-State the levy in respect of the entire mileage could not 
be of compensatory nature; and (3) there was no justification for levy-
ing tax on spare buses. 
Dismissing the appeals, 
HELD: (I) (a) The facts and figur°' disclosed in the counter affi-
davits of the State do not justify a conclusion that the levy was a general 
one for augmenting the revenues of the State. 
Even after the levy the 
total receipts from the tax fell short of expenditure on roads and allied 
purposes. 
The enhancement was onlv intended to meet the expanding 
requirements of maintenauce of old roads and development of the road 
system as a whole and is therefore only a compensatory =asure. [862 
G-H] 
(bl Further, the impost would not result in bus operators running 
their busines; at a loss, espechlly when they had been permitted to in-
crease the fares. r862 HJ 
( C:;) The figures relied upon by the appellants in the report of tho 
Road Transport Taxation Inquiry Committee do not give a completely 
accurate picture relevant to the present case. L860 E-0] 
Nazeeria Motor Services v. Andhra Pradesh, 
(1970] 
2 S.C.R. 52, 
followed. 
(2) There were reciprocal arrangements between 
the 
States 
and 
consequently the provisions made by the other States in regard to th~ 
7-L736S"pCl/72 
854 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1972] 2 s.c.R. 
free mo\;ement on their roads c.onstitute<l a compensatory measure for 
the tax even though it was wholly levied by the respondent State. [862 
F-GJ 
( 3) It was imperative for the owner of a fleet of buses to maintam 
spare vehicles to be av.ailable for substitution in 
case 
of breakdown. 
Accordingly, the levv of tax on such buses which can at any time be 
put ·on the road is justified and s. 3 empowers the State to leyy sucib a 
tax on a motor vehicl~ kept for use. [863 A-CJ 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 932 to 
934 of 1968. 
A 
B 
Appeals from the judgment and order dated September 6, 
1963 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 
C 
361, 430 and .706 of 1963 a:11d Civil Appeals Nos. 1439 to 1441 
of 1968. 
Appeals from the judgment and order dated April 26, 1968 
of the Aiidhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 1792, 
1818 and 1819 of 1968 and Writ Petitions Nos. 164 and 166 of 
o 
1968. 
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforce-
ment of the Fundamental Rights. 
S. V. Gupte, K. Srinivasamurthy, Naunit Lal and Swaranjit 
E 
Sodhi, for the appellants (in all the appeals) and the Petitioners 
(in both the Petitions). 
P. Ram Reddy and G. Narayana Rao, for respondents Nos. 
1 and 2 (in C.A. No. 932 of 1968). 
P. Ram Reddy and .:f. V, V. Nair, for the respondents (in 
F 
C.A. Nos. 933 and 934 of 1968). 
P. Ram Reddy and K. la,Yaram, for the respondents (in C.A. 
Nos. 1439 to 1441 of 1968 and W.Ps. Nos. 164 and 166 of 
1968). 
. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Mitter, J. All these appeals and Writ Petitions are directed 
a~ainst rthe Andhra Pr.adesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (V of 
1963) and notifications issued thereunder. In the first group of 
appeals, the no

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