AMENDED PETITION IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARHAT BILASPUR CS;)___ -^. .__.-^ W_.P. t@) N0; 4431 OF 2006 PETITIONER B: s (1) M/s. Kanker Roadways, (Partnership firm) fhrough managing parter Shri Preetara Singh Garcha, S/o. Late Shri Jogender Singh Garcha, aged about59 years, R/0. Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) (2) Rajnandgaon Roadlines (Partnership Finn) through partner NaTendra Pal Suigh Garcha, S/o. Late Shri Jogpndra Singh Garcha., aged about 49 years, R/o, ciyil lines, Raipur (C.S.) ' (3) Katiker Road lines. (PartneFshtp firm) thrQugh Navpreet Singh Garcha, S/o. Preetam Singh Garcha, ^ed about 26 years, E/a Ciyil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) ^^ (4) M/s, Ashwani Rajkumar, Mming and Traduig GQrBpaay. through proprietor Raj Kumaj- GuEHw^ia,. Geedara Road, Jsgdalpur (fe©.| ^ VERSUS •ig; RBSPONDENTS ^ (1) Municipal Council, Bacheli, Tbrough Chief Miuucipal Officer, Bacheli, Distfc Bastar, Clihattisgarh. (2) Nagar Panphayat, Geedara, Through President, Nagar_ PanGhayat, Geedarc4 Distt, BastaTr Chhattisgarh. (3) Municipal CouncU of Kanlcer, Distt. Kanker (C-G.) through C.M.O- PE'Bn'IQN UNr>ERARTICLES226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OFINDIA ^ '^^'^^1 w.xss ^•^^^S^^^.^^^^^'.^^L^S*^ •-/•":"'.-!<§• \ Amit HIGH COURT ©ECHHATTISGAKH AT BILASJPUR WR[TPETmON(C') No.443lQf20Q6 PETmONERS : M/s. KankerR<?adways& Others. VERSUS. , , ^ ; : • RESPQNDENTS : Municipal Gouncil, Bacheli & Others. PETmON UNDER ARTIGLES 226 OF THE CONSTmjnON OE INDIA SB: Hon'Ue Shri SatisliK.Asnaurtri.J. Present: Shri Vivek Verma, Advpcate forthe petitioner. Shri Sudeep A@-awal, Advocate appearingonbehalfof • Shri SanjayK.Agrawal, Advocatefbrtfae respondent No. 1&2. ORDER<ORAI,) (Passed on21st dayof October, 2010) / I. By this petifion, the petitioneFs^eek a writ in the nature of prdhibition, restrainmg the respondents from impbsing and reeovering Siiyidha ShuBc/Entry Fee fi-om the Stage Camage/BuseSQfthepetitiimers. 2. The issue of unposition o£stand fee/tax from fhe buses which are parited in the bus Stand witihin the territorial limit of Municipal Council, Kirandul, Came up for consideration in W.P. No. 4227/2004 (M/s. Kanker Roadways & Others v.. Municipal Coancil, Kirandul & Others). The said issue has been con.sidered aad decided in the light df the well settled proposition pf law;,as laid down by the Supreme Court mMiiniGipalcouncit,:Mctnasay. Mr.s:State Rodd Transport Carpn. & Anofer^ wfaerein the impugped aGtion of the Mumcipal Council was held to be not sustainable mfhe eyes oflaw. 3. Accordingly, dus petitiori is allowed in fhe same terms as passed in W.P. No; 4227/2004 (M/s. Kanker Roadways & Others v. Municipal Council,Kirandul&Others). Satish K. Agnihotri Judge I(1997)11SCC640