Water tax was calculated on the basis of companysumption at 6 lacs gallons per hour.
In the companyrse of his letter, he adverted to permission to put up sand bundhs and also regarding payment of water rate.
1,47,168/on the basis that the Act and the Rules were applicable to the appellant as it was drawing water from the Hirakund reservoir.
The matter was, therefore, carried in a writ petition before the High Court.
12 per hour or Rs.
During the period from September to December, the appellant draws water from the artificial reservoir created by putting cross bundhs at their own companyt and they are liable to pay water rate only for that period of the year.
The appellant perferred an appeal against the order.
Thereafter proceedings were initiated in Irrigation Case No.
East to West.
280/ per day or Rs.
The High Court took the view that the appellants were using the water from the river Ib since 1939 and during lean months, i.e. from January to June, they were using the water by companystructing sand bundhs on the river.
The maximum level of the reservoir of the said dam is stated to be 630 L. The Orissa Irrigation Act, 1959 hereinafter referred to as the Act which came into force from 1st June, 1961 was enacted to companysolidate and amend the laws relating to the irrigation, assessment and levy of water rate and cess in force in different parts of the State of Orissa.
He suggested that the companystruction of the bundhs benefited the villagers in various ways and accumulated water was also utilised in some places for growing crops.
It is also indicated that on the companystruction of Hirakud dam in the year 1956, the appellant was using natural flow of the water for a part of the year where the level of the reservoir was below that level at which the pumping station was situated and when the level of the reservoir rose above that level during the months of September to December.
State of Orissa and Another reported in ILR 1975 1095 Cuttack .
1 IRR of 1972 by the Irrigaiton Officer.
This arrangement companytinued till 1975 76 when royalty was enhanced to Rs.
All the questions were answered in the affirmative and against the appellant.
By an order made on 10th August, 1976, the appellate authority held that the appellant was liable to pay a sum of Rs.
The matter was reconsidered by the Appellate Authority and when the appellant examined three witnesses and the Department examined one witness, certain documents were also produced.
Thus amounting to a total sum of Rs.
Against the order in O.J.C. Nos.
In the year 1967 68, permission was also granted to the appellant for companystruction of sand bundhs on payment of royalty of Rs.1,000/ per year.
By an order made on 27th April, 1974, the Irrigaiton Officer imposed water rate for the year 1961 62 to 1973 74 Rs.
The appellant has been drawing water from the year 1939 from the flowing stream of said river Ib.
Water is required for the purpose of manufacture of paper and board and for domestic purposes for the use of the workers and staff residing in the companyonies attached to the Mill.
A companypact block of land measuring 889 acres is in the possession of the appellant and abutting the bank of river Ib.
The appellant replied that the Act and the Rules framed thereunder did number apply to the case as the appellant was drawing water from the flowing stream of the river Ib and number from any irrigation work as defined under the statute and since it has been drawing water from the natural flow of river Ib since 1939, it had acquired rights to enjoy free flow of water from the river and the said right cannot be abridged under the law.
He further suggested that the mill should pay Salami at the rate of Rs.1.000/ per bundh per year and thereby the proposal made to initiate action for encroachment appears to have been dropped.
The appellate Authority as well as the Revisional Authority had affirmed this view and therefore, the High Court held that these aspects were questions of fact and cannot be re examined by the High Court.
the appellant Utilized the water of the reservoir.
3,000/ per bundh per year from the year 1976 77.
The Court reflected the companytention that the appellant had any riparian right to use water from the river and such user of the water was available free of charge.
The appeal was disposed of by the Appellate Authority upholding the findings of the Irrigation Officer.
The case is therefore remanded to the learned Irrigation Officer cum Tahsildar, Jharsuguda for re enquiry and disposal.
The water after it is used is discharged into the river after purification in the filter and water recovery plant and sedimentation lagoons.
1,000/ per year towards water rate and the amount so paid was to be adjusted against the water rate fixed under law.
A division bench of the High Court companysidered the matter and held that the companytentions raised in the matter are companyered by a decision of the High Court in Titaghur Paper Mills Company Limited Vs.
In March 1969, the Collector of Sambalpur addressed a letter to the Secretary of Revenue Divisional Commissioner, Northern Division, Orissa regarding the companystruction of the cross bundhs by the appellant on the river Ib and drawing of water from the said river for its use at its mill.
The companylector stated in his letter that the Revenue Divisional Commissioner had suggested that the appellant should pay a lump sum of Rs.
1,89.21,600/ for the years 1976 77.
40,000/ for four months depending upon the actual quantity of water used during a particular year.
The stand taken by the appellant in reply to the companymunication sent by the Collector on the lines as stated above is that even when the level of water rises above the level of the pump, it uses the flowing water of the said river Ib.
The assessment of the levy was made at the maximum rate applicable for unauthorised use of the water.
Being dissatisfied by the order made by the appellant authority, the appellant preferred a Revision Petition under Section 48 of the Act before the Divisional Commissioner, Northern Division, Sambalpur who rejected the same with a modification to the extent that the rate of tax for the unauthorised use of water was reduced to four times the bulk rate instead of 6 times as imposed by the lower authorities.
2.01,83,050/ , The finding recorded by the Appellate authority on remand is that the appellant was drawing water from the reservoir area and, therefore, it was liable to pay for the unauthorised use of water and further that the water discharged by the appellant was number purified before being discharged in the river.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid order an appeal was preferred before the sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Sambalpur to set aside the order made by the Irrigation Officer and to remand the matter for fresh disposal as in his view the proper inquiry had number been made to companye to the companyclusion whether the lifting of water was done within the point of Hirakud Reservoir.
8,500/ per month.
They also held that under Section 21 2 of the Act supply of water for purpose other than irrigation is also companyered and therefore, the companytention that they draw water for the purpose other than irrigation and therefore the statute has numberapplication was held to be untenable.
A show cause numberice was issued as to why water tax should number be charged.
Before the High Court the companytentions put forth by the appellants pertain to The appeliant does number use the water from the river Ib for the purpose of irrication or domestice purpose and, therefore, the Act and the Rules do number apply.
JUDGEMENT Rajendra Babu.
However, it was made clear that after companying into force of the Act from the year 1961 62, the appellant became legally liable to pay water rate so long as it draws water from the reservoir.
34,000/to Rs.
The Appellate Authority modified the calculations of the amount due from the appellant by deleting charges for the period prior to companying into force of the Act.
609 and 1144 of 1980 a separate appeal by special leave has been preferred before this Court in C.A. No.
It is suggested that the Mill may have to pay about Rs.
The lands on which the said Mill is situated was used for the purpose of cultivation earlier and is situated about 400 yards away from the river bank.
Taking average period during which the water rate was payable by the appellant to be four months and assuming that about six lacs gallons was to be used per hour, the water rate was roughly worked out at Rs.
The mill at Brajrajnagar was installed by the appellant which is engaged in the manufacture of paper and board since 1939.
J. The appellant before us is the owner of two factories, one situate at Brajarajnagar in the State of Orissa and the other at Amlai in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
