LI Network
Published on: December 10, 2023, 10:09 PM
The Bombay High Court has emphasized that equality cannot be claimed on the grounds of any illegality and, furthermore, cannot be enforced by a court in a negative manner.
A division bench comprising Justice GS Kulkarni and Justice Jitendra Jain underscored that Article 14 of the Constitution, guaranteeing equality before the law, embodies a positive concept.
The court maintained that citizens or courts cannot seek to enforce equality in a negative fashion. The ruling clarified that if any illegality or irregularity favors an individual or group, others cannot approach the High Court or the Supreme Court urging the state or a relevant authority to commit the same illegality or irregularity.
The court highlighted that such petitioners may challenge the validity of state actions benefiting undeserving individuals, but they cannot demand orders not sanctioned by law based on the principle of equality before the law.
The case involved a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a declaration that specific provisions of the Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923, inserted by the Bombay Entertainment Duty (Amending) Act, 1998, were ultra vires.
The petitioners, engaged in water sports activities and having leased land from the Maharashtra Tourism and Development Corporation (MTDC), contested the imposition of entertainment duty by the respondents.
The dispute led to a statutory appeal, and the Revisional Authority granted partial exemption, prompting the petitioners to seek a refund through the petition.
The petitioners argued discrimination under Article 14, citing instances where similar operators allegedly avoided entertainment duty. Respondents countered, asserting that the activities of the petitioners differed, and the petitioners were aware of their liability.
The court rejected the contention that relief should be granted to the petitioners because the state did not recover taxes from similar activities conducted by others.
It stressed that this would amount to seeking relief based on negative equality, a concept incompatible with legal principles. The court firmly stated that equality cannot be claimed on any illegality and cannot be enforced in a negative manner by the court.
To illustrate the point, the court provided a scenario involving two individuals, Mr. A and Mr. B, engaged in the same business activity. If Mr. B evades tax without facing consequences, Mr. A cannot file a writ petition claiming a refund based on the argument that his equality rights under Article 14 have been violated. The court deemed such a contention legally absurd and unacceptable.
Case title: Drishti Adventures Sports Private Ltd. & Anr. vs State of Maharashtra & Ors.