The said case representation seeking reduction in water rate was under companysideration of Government.
The Corporation had raised the issue representation against this price revision with the State Government.
The said Circular provided for the amended policy of water supply of industrial and residential use, which was required to take effect from June 1, 2003.
Consequent thereto a letter was written to the appellant herein by Deputy Engineer, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, on 06.06.2005 intimating him that he is required to pay water bills for the period from 01.11.2001 to 30.11.2005 as per revised rates.
Relevant portion of the Circular is reproduced hereunder As per the Circular dated 24.10.2001 of the Irrigation Department, water rate is increased for industrial use water rate 200 percent for residential use water rate 100 percent for use water as raw material water rate at 1000 percent.
The rates so fixed or altered by the Corporation shall be final and binding on the companysumer.
Respondent number 4 while acting upon a recommendation of the Finance Commission issued Government Resolution No.
Against the said decision of the High Court, appellant has filed the present appeal, on which, we heard the learned companynsel appearing for the parties.
By Circulars dated 27.05.2003 and 11.06.2003 equal rates were fixed for the water supply to all industries including the industries using water Page 14 of 36 as raw material in industrial area.
of Industries, Mantralaya is respondent number 1, the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation MIDC is respondent number 2 which is responsible for infrastructure required for any industry, i.e. land, water and electricity.
However, while implementing this policy it is found that in some industrial area, the use of water by industries which are using water as raw material, is in huge extent.
Since the rates of water use as raw material, are more than five time of the water tax rate of general industrial use, the financial burden of amount of difference is falling on Corporation.
Respondent Corporation has also stated on oath that each industrial establishment has been companymunicated in the year 2001 and thereafter every time in respect of revision of water rates by the Corporation.
ii For the period from 01/12/2002 to 30/04/2005 For the aforesaid period, the amount of difference of amended bill be recovered in six equal instalments.
SANKIRN 2002/ 148/2002 IM P , whereby the water cess for different categories was amended as follows Page 10 of 36 Category 1 Water used for purpose of drinking present rates of water cess doubled.
Clause 42 of the agreement provides for a forum of Chief Engineer, MIDC, for resolution of the disputes arising out of interpretation or otherwise of the regulations and that the decision of the dispute resolution authority shall be final and binding on the companysumer.
The High Court vide its order dated 6.9.2005 stayed the operation of the numberices dated 6.6.2005 and 24.6.2005 and allowed the appellant to companytinue to Page 22 of 36 pay the bills at the pre revised earlier rates and charges.
Ltd. is incorporated in India under the Companies Act, 1956 for manufacturing and distributing carbonated soft drinks, bottled drinking water and other food products.
5834 of 2005 challenging the Govt.
The rates of water charges so fixed or altered shall be companyclusive and be binding on the companysumers.
G/7 dated 27/05/2003, the rates of water supply be amended from 1/11/2001.
Petitioners have companytended that numberdistinction can be made in respect of levy of water charges on account of user of water for numbermal industrial use or for use as a raw material for finished products.
Page 28 of 36 A companymunication, however, came to be issued on 27.05.2003 by the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation referring to circular dated 24.10.2001 and 28.11.2002 issued by the Irrigation Department.
Recovery of Bills of water supply Page 15 of 36 For the period from 01/11/2001 to 30/11/2002 The water tax be levied at revised rates for the aforesaid period.
of water supply of respective industrial area issued by issued under Circular No.
The Corporation shall increase or decrease the water charges in its discretion after giving numberice of one month to the companysumer.
On 13.08.2002, respondent number 2 issued another Circular informing the pendency of representations before the Government, in which it was also stated that industrialists are allowed to pay the bills at the old rates and the same should be accepted and the balance amount should be shown as arrears.
Consequent upon revision of the rates by the Government at which rate the Corporation is to make payment to the Government, the Corporation has numberother alternative but to revise the same and follow the increase rates as demanded by the State Government itself.
The rate of water supply of the companysumers under the Industrial area using water as raw material will be the same as of the rates in Industrial area.
Thereafter, M s. Waluj Industrial Association Paithan, Aurangabad, who was facing the similar situation as the appellant herein, filed Writ Petition No.
Consequently, High Court declined to quash the numberices and disposed of the petition with following directions Respondent Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation shall be at liberty to levy water charges at revised rates.
Appellant in the year 2005 filed a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay which was registered as WP No.
The respondents thereafter to companyplete the entire exercise within 16 weeks from today.
On the petitioners providing such information supported by documentary evidence, the respondents to charge the petitioners in terms of the directions issued by this companyrt in writ petition number 4263 of 2005.
G/7/2003 wherein the rate of water supply of the companysumers under the industrial area using water as raw material was fixed at same as Page 11 of 36 of the rates in industrial area.
G 32/2001 informing the industrial organisations that the proposed increase in rates is due to the increase in water charges effected by respondent number 4 and till the time respondent number 4 does number withdraw the increase in water charges, the respondent number 2 cannot reduce the water rates.
On 24.06.2005, respondent number 3 issued another letter to the appellant reiterating the observations made by the Deputy Engineer, MIDC, and reminding the appellant about the increased water rates for companysumers using water as a raw material with effect from 01.11.2001.
Relevant part of the Circular is reproduced hereunder In accordance with Government Resolution dated 28.11.2002 of the Irrigation Department, the rates of using residential water use and industrial water use under the Industrial area and outside the area by Circular No.
The Corporation also has the right to disconnect the water supply in the event of companytingencies provided under the regulations.
28.11.2002, the Irrigation Department has Page 12 of 36 increased 15 percent increase from 1.7.2002 and 15 percent increase from 1.7.2003.
Category 2 Water for industrial use present rates of water increased doubled.
However, so far as portion of water supplied, which is being used for Page 21 of 36 manufacture of liquor, beverages, etc.,
Page 4 of 36 Regulation 28 provides for recovery of arrears on account of water charges or any other expenses incurred by the Corporation in companynection with water supply to the companysumer, which shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue.
Clause 27 of the Water Supply Regulations, 1973 are as under Clause 27 Water Rate The charges for water shall be fixed by the Corporation from time to time.
Many industrial units operating within the industrial area have tendered undertakings in the prescribed form in companypliance with the directives issued by MIDC.
3.65 per cubic meter which was increased to Rs.
The argument advanced by petitioners regarding impermissibility of revision of water rates by the Corporation with retrospective effect is number acceptable.
Raigad.
G/30 dated 31.10.2001 and the rate for use water as raw material, the rates were made applicable as per Circular No.
4263/2005.
Resolutions passed by Respondent number 4 dated 12.09.2001, 24.10.2001 and 28.11.2002 along with letters issued by Respondent Nos.
34.60 per c.m.
2 3 dated 6.6.2005 and 24.6.2005 and prayed for quashing the same by issuance of writ of certiorari or such other writ and to direct the respondents to refrain from severing any water companynections with respect to industrial units of the appellant.
On the same day respondent number 2 issued another Circular No.
The appellant was directed to pay the instalments failing which the amount would be charged along with interest to be calculated after six months.
In respect of the said arrears, separate orders will be issued as per the decision of Irrigation Department.
By these circulars, equal rates are fixed for the water supply to all industries including the industries using water as raw material in industrial area.
Respective petitioners may make suitable representations to the Respondents in respect of revision of water rates effective from 2002 onwards and on receipt of the representations, Respondents shall take appropriate decision on companysidering grievances raised by respective petitioners.
The rates of water supply of such customers be amended as follows Revised rates By extending the rates by Rs.
G 8 dated 11.6.2003, the orders are issued regarding as to how the said rates should be implemented.
The specific stand of the respondents in respect of their liability to supply water in lieu of water charges emanates from their responsibility of making water available to the residential houses, industries, factories and entrepreneurs and also to those industries where water is used as raw material and the companyporation does number by itself generates water and instead of it procure water from the respondent number.
Consequent upon issuance of the Circulars by the Government regarding increase in the rate of water charges the matter of taking a policy decision in respect of water supply was put up before the Board of Directors of the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, who had taken a decision that the rate of water supply of the companysumers under the industrial area using water as raw material, will be same as of the rates in industrial area.
On 28.11.2002, respondent number 4 issued a fresh Govt.
The distinction made for charging different rates in respect of user of water for numbermal industrial use as well as in respect of user as a raw material for manufacturing activity is based on intelligible differentia and is based on sound reasoning.
It was specified that for the period November 1, 2001 to November 30, 2002, the different amount as per the revised rates should be shown as arrears in the water bills.
wherein water is used as a raw material, Respondent Corporation would be within their right to recover water charges at higher rates, whereas the portion of water utilized for the purposes other than the manufacturing activity as raw materials, Respondent Corporation shall have to recover water charges at numbermal rates.
The said Writ Petition was filed by the appellant herein questioning the levy of increased Page 1 of 36 water charges on ground that it cannot be given retrospective effect by the respondent herein.
Category 3 Industries where water is being used as a raw material as drinking water, for such industries that is, companyd drinks, mineral water etc.
Regulation 2 2 defines Consumer, which means any person or persons who has applied for supply of water from any works of the Corporation and to whom MIDC has agreed to supply water or any person or persons otherwise liable for payment of water charges to the Corporation.
Clause 36 of the Water Supply Agreement provides for penalty in case of failure on part of the companysumer to pay the water bill.
By the said letter respondent number 2 informed the appellant that respondent number 4 had increased the rate of royalty Page 16 of 36 by five times w.e.f.
36.50 pcm to Rs.
Consequently, however, vide order dated 4.09.2009 High Court dismissed the Writ Petition of the appellant in terms of the decision of the companyrdinate bench of the said High Court in Writ Petition No.
Subsequently, some industrial associations organisations industrialists made representations to the State Government requesting it number to increase the water cess.
iii Recovery of bills of water supply from 1/5/2005 The recovery of further bills from 1/5/2005 be made regularly by amended rates of water supply as above.
present rates of water increase ten times.
G/7/2003 and by Circular No.
It was also specified that the revised rates would increase by 15 in the month of July of every following year.
The amount of difference drawn by amended rates of water be shown as arrears.
On October 24, 2001 the respondent number 4 issued another Govt.
By referring to Circular dated 28.11.2002, it was stated that water rate for industrial use has been decreased from 200 percent to 100 percent but the increase in residential use of water as raw material is companyfirmed.
Through this letter appellant was directed to submit bank guarantee of Rs.
Raigad from Voltas Limited, the original owners of the property.
On perusal of the decisions rendered by the State Government in respect of levy of royalty for supply of water to MIDC at higher rates, companytained in various Government Resolutions, it is difficult to accept the argument advanced by the petitioners that there is numbernexus for upward revision of water charges by the MIDC.
Above increase in rates was made effective from 1st September, 2001 as per clause A4.
Voltas issued its numberobjection to transfer water companynection in the name of the appellant.
On the arrears of amount of its difference, numberlate fees be charged till 30.11.2005.
Consequently, the appellant was placed in the third category i.e. industry using water as raw material.
Regulation 35 is in respect of Water Rate, which reads as under Regulation 35 Water Rate The companysumer shall pay the charges for water supply which shall be fixed by the Corporation from time to time.
69,97,385/ towards differential amount due to revision of water rates and to pay Rs.
On 06.06.2005, the Deputy Engineer of respondent number 2 issued a letter to the appellant regarding revision of water rates for the companysumers within the Industrial Area using water as raw material.
Clause 27 of the Water Supply Agreement provides that the Respondents shall fix charges for water from time to time and increase or decrease the water charges in its discretion after giving numberice of one month to the companysumer.
26,27,103/ each.
Since then, the respondent number 3 has been issuing all the water bills in the name of the appellant.
36.50 pcm from September 1, 2001 for industries where water is being used as a raw material as drinking water.
Regulation 51 provides that for disputes arising out of the interpretation or otherwise of the provisions of the Agreement, the decision of the Chief Engineer, MIDC shall be final and binding on the companysumer.
The Corporation issued numberices to different industrial establishments in respect of revision of water rates and made demand in respect of payment of water charges at revised rates.
However, the rate of water of such companysumers outside industrial area be charged by including difference of rates of water tax.
The amount of arrears may number be shown in the monthly bill of water and for recovery of this amount, undertaking be taken from the customers on companyrt stamp paper of Rs.
Regulation 36 provides for recovery of arrears as land revenue.
The Page 7 of 36 companyrigendum changed the increased water cess from the new rates of Rs.
G/08/2003 revising rates of water supply for the period from November 1, 2001 till May 31, 2003.
The old rate of water was Rs.
The Corporation shall increase the water charges in its discretion after giving numberice of one month to the companysumer.
On that basis, the appellant was directed to pay water cess, on increased rates.
For recovering the increasing rate in water charges, by amending the rate of water supply of Corporation, were made applicable by Circular No.
The Association has protested against the hike in water charges and requested the Corporation to take up the issue with Irrigation Ministry.
40 pcm and made the same effective from September 1, 2001 with a clarification that while deciding fixing water rates vide Government Resolution No.
Similar companymunications find place in the record dated 14th July 2003 by Industries Association of Young Entrepreneurs, Aurangabad and dated 24th July 2003 by the Chamber of Marathwada Industries and Agriculture.
26,27,103/ each from May 2005 to October, 2005.
The primary business of the appellant is to manufacture number alcoholic beverages in its plant and for the manufacturing of the same, water is used as one of the raw materials.
Resolution No.
In this case, however, we are companycerned with the manufacturing plant of the appellant located at Roha.
It was also intimated therein that the representation seeking reduction of water charges is under the companysideration of the Government and therefore though the bills are sent to the companysumers at increased rate, a companycession was given to pay the same at the earlier rate.
First instalment be recovered with the bill of May, 2005 and last instalment be recovered with the bill of October, 2005.
Page 3 of 36 There are regulations in respect of supply of water, namely, Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Water Supply Regulations.
G/17 dated 30.7.2002, with effect from 01.11.2001.
In the said case similar agreement and the same regulation were applicable to the writ petitioner as the present appellant.
01.09.2001 for companysumers within the Industrial Area using water as raw material and appellant was further informed that its rate has been revised to Rs.
WSR 10001/ 5/2001 IM P .
4263 of 2005 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, challenging the Page 18 of 36 circulars and numberices issued by respondents.
G/06/2003 was issued by Chief Engineer Head Office MIDC, Mumbai 93 stating about the water tariff increase and thereby companyfirming the rates set out vide Govt.
Appellant stated that it is one of the leading manufacturers of Carbonated Soft Drinks and bottled drinking water in the entire State of Maharashtra and a significant portion of the entire national demand for the appellants product is met from the production made within the State of Maharashtra itself.
WSR 1001/ 5/2001 IM P dated September 12, 2001, some deficiencies were left out and the same are being removed by Errata dt.
Page 5 of 36 Appellant purchased its plant at 100/1, A Road, MIDC, Dhatav, Roha, Distt.
WSR 1001/ 5/2001 IM P dated September 12, 2001 increasing the water cess.
Resolution dated 28.11.2002.
1,57,62,618/ being differential amount from December 1, 2002 to April 30, 2004 in six equal installments of Rs.
Page 20 of 36 It is, therefore, unacceptable that petitioners were number aware of the decision rendered in respect of revision of water rates by the Corporation and were also number companymunicated about such decision.
The High Court held in the following manner It will be open to the petitioners to submit documentary evidence before the respondents showing the water which they were using as a raw material and the water which they were using for allied activities.
With a view number to put financial burden of such type on Corporation, the decision of amending the rates of water supply of the customers using water as raw material under the Industrial area, has been taken.
On the amount companyes due to difference in rate of water during this period, late fee may number be charged.
The said companypany had entered into a Water Supply Agreement with respondent number 3 for its facilities at Dhatav, Roha under the Water Supply Regulation Act, 1973.
A number of representations came to be filed from various aggrieved persons due to which a Circular dated 6.12.2001 was issued permitting the industries to pay at the pre revised earlier rates in order to reconsider old rates in view of the fact that several representations were pending and were being companysidered by the State Government.
The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the appellant PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt.
It was further stated that representations received have been forwarded to the Government and therefore during the pendency of the said representations, the industrialists can pay the water bills at previous rates.
The plant from where the appellant operates its unit at Roha, Maharashtra was earlier owned by another companypany by the name Voltas India Limited.
On 06.12.2001, respondent number 2 issued a Circular No.
Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J. Leave granted.
The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 04.11.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.
5834 of 2005.
Resolution Errata No.
A further application appears to have been tendered by the Chamber of Marathwada Industries and Agriculture on 16th August 2003 in respect of revision of water rates and companymunications made by the Corporation in that behalf to respective industrial units.
The State of Maharashtra, represented by Secretary, Deptt.
