Ms Shankar Industries through Its Proprietor Jivlal Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Deptt of Industries Mines and Geology
Case brief
What is this about?
Batch writ petitions before Jharkhand High Court (DB) challenging 'Composition User Fee' levied under Jharkhand Highways Fee (Determination of Rates & Collection) Rules, 2021 and Amendment Rules 2021/2022/2025 on mineral-laden mechanical vehicles (>9 tonnes) using State roads or commuting in mining areas, collected via JIMMS portal on generation of transit challan/e-way bill. Court held levy ultra vires Section 2, Indian Tolls Act, 1851: toll is compensatory with quid pro quo; taxable event is actual user of an identified State road/bridge at a toll gate; altering the taxable event to mineral transport/mining-area commuting changes the parent Act's scheme; roads unidentified causing ambiguity resolved against the State (Vatika Township); classification excluding non-mineral carriers violates Article 14; MADA (2024) 10 SCC 1 distinguished as levy not under Entries 49/50 List II; DMF under s.9B MMDR Act noted. Rules struck down; refunds adjustable against existing/future liability; s.9 previous-publication and MMDR-field contentions left open. Key terms: toll, composition user fee, JIMMS transit challan, Indian Tolls Act 1851 ss.2/3/7/8/9, Indian Tolls (Jharkhand Amendment) Act 2002 ss.2A/2B, MMDR Act 1957 ss.9B/15(4)/15A/23C, Entry 59 List II, Articles 14/162/246/265, Devi Dayal Singh, Hansraj & Sons, MSK Projects, DSC-Viacon, Vatika Township, Aashirwad Films.