JUDGMENT S.B. Sinha, C.J.

1. All these three writ petitions questioning the orders passed by the appellate authority constituted under Section 13 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act. 1977 (hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as 'the said Act') raise a question as regards interpretation of item No. 14 of the 1 Schedule appended thereto viz., whether a thermal power generating industry which is operated by natural gas or gas based would come within the purview thereof.

2. Mr. Rammohan Rao, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners inter alia submits that having regard to the provisions contained in the said Act and having regard to the fact that the said Act is a fiscal statute, the same must be construed strictly. The learned counsel would submit that having regard to the fact that item No. 14 of the 1 Schedule appended to the said Act refers to Thermal, Diesel and Hydel Power generating industries, which would clearly go to show that those power generating industries which are gas based would not come within the purview thereof. Strong reliance in this connection has been placed on the decisions of the Apex Court in Member Secretary, A.P.S.E.B. For P & C.W.P. v. A. P. Rayons and Britannia Industries Ltd. v. T. N. Pollution Control Board . Mr. Rammohan Rao would urge that in any event the appellate authority under the said Act had not analysed or discussed the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners herein and thus fell into error in arriving at a conclusion that the industries run by the petitioners would also come within the purview of the said Act without assigning any reason.

3. Mr. Bhatt, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Pollution Control Board, on the other hand would submit that even for the purpose of running the said industries the petitioners have obtained consent and in that view of the matter there cannot be any doubt that the said Act will apply.

4. The said Act was enacted to provide for the levy of collection of cess on water consumed by persons carrying on certain industries and by local authorities, with a view to augment the resources of the Central Board and the State Boards for the prevention and control of water pollution constituted under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Section 2 (c) of the said Act defines "specified industry" to mean "any industry specified in the 1 Schedule". Section 3 is the charging provision in terms whereof a cess shall be collected and levied for the purpose of the 1974 Act and utilization thereunder inter alia by every person carrying on any specified industry. Schedule-I, as noticed hereinbefore, in terms of Section 2(c) of the said Act refers to the "specified industry".

5. Item No. 14 as was substituted by GSR No. 377 (E) 93 dated 16-4-1993 reads thus :

"Power (Thermal, Diesel and Hydel) gen-

erating industries".

Prior thereto, the said item read :

"Power (Thermal and Diessel) generating industry."

The word "Hydel" has thus been included within the bracket.

6. The submission of Mr. Rammohan Rao appears to be that those power generating industries wherein the fuel is coal would come within the purview of the word "thermal" and not the "other power generating industries."

7. This submission of the learned counsel cannot be accepted. The thermal power generating stations are not operated with coal only. Before the appellate authority, the respondents have stated:

"a. As per the Schedule-I of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977, item 14 refers to Power (Thermal, Diesel) and Hydel Generating Industry. The word Thermal includes power generation from all fossile fuels viz. Coal, Petroleum, Lignite, natural Gas, Biogas etc. b. As per the "Concise Oxford Dictionary", "Chambers Dictionery", "Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English" and Longman Dictionary of English Language", the word Thermal means "Concerned with or caused by heat". Hence, the power generated through heat is called a Thermal Power Plant. A Thermal Power Plant includes power generation through heat from all fossil fuels viz. coal, lignite, Petroleum Products, Natural Gas, Biogas, etc. As in the instant case, the electrical power is generated through heat energy using natural gas as fuel, the Appellant is included in Schedule-1 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977."

8. There cannot be any dispute whatsoever that the said Act being a fiscal statute must be construed strictly, but as has been observed by the Apex Court in A.P.Rayons (supra) that while interpreting a taxing statute there is no room for intendment there is no equality on the part of the tax there is no presumption as to tax, nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied, one has to look fairly at the language used. It is therefore trite that for the purpose of finding out as to whether the provisions of a fiscal statute are attracted in a given case or not; what is necessary to be considered is to look fairly at the language used.

9. The words "thermal, diesel and hydel" are within bracket. The emphasis of the said Act is therefore on the power generating industries. Any thermal power generating industries, which are operated by any method other than coal, are also included therein. It is in the aforementioned context the word "thermal" assumes relevance. The word "thermal" has been defined in chambers Dictionary to mean "pertaining to or producing heat". Thus, the purpose of a thermal power generating industry would be to produce power through it. In other words, by reason of such thermal power industries heat energy is converted into electrical energy.

10. Even if commonsense meaning is attributed to the word "thermal", the same result would be achieved without causing violence to the language used.

11. We are, therefore, of the opinion that even if a literal meaning or a commonsense meaning is attributed to the word "thermal", the same would mean, where power is generated through generation of heat.

12. Item No. 14 of the Schedule appended to the said Act must be interpreted in the context of the object of the statute. Even if "gas" is used as a fuel, it is not in dispute that "water" is used in the process of generation of power.

13. In Saraswathi Sugar Mills v. Haryana State Board the Apex Court held :

"The object of the Act is to control the water pollution and to ensure that industrial effluents are not allowed to be discharged into the water courses without adequate treatment. The Cess Act is not an enactment to regulate and control pollution but a fiscal measure to raise revenue for augmenting the resources of the Pollution Control Boards. The levy and collection of cess provided under the Cess Act is on water consumed by persons carrying on the industries specified in the Schedule. The cess is levied on the person carrying on the specified industry.

Pollution Act may be a regulating Act but Cess Act is fiscal enactment, as is held by this Court in Member Secretrary, A.P. State Board for Prevention and Control of Water Pollution v. A.P. Rayons Ltd. and Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Cess Appellate Committee . Therefore we have to look merely at what is clearly said. There is no room for any intendment and there is no room for bringing within the provision of the Act anything by implication."

14. Britannia Industries (supra) whereupon Mr. Rammohan Rao places strong reliance, in our opinion, is not apposite. The question, which fell for consideration therein was that the word "vegetable" has to be interpreted in common parlance and the sugarcane which was the subject matter of consideration in the said case was held to be not a "vegetable" and the Apex Court did not intend to attribute a botanical meaning thereto. Such is not the position in the instant case.

15. This aspect of the matter has been considered by this Bench in W.P. No. 10048 of 1995 which was disposed of on 22-6-2001, wherein this Court also relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in D.E.S.U. v. Central BD. for The Prevention & Control of Water Pollution 1995 Supp (3) SCC 385.

16. So far as the second contention raised by Mr. Rammohan Rao to the effect that this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the appellate authority pales into insignificance, in view of the fact that when the jurisdictional questions are raised before this Court basing on an interpretation of a statute and as this Court has interpreted the same, it matters not as to whether one aspect or the other of the matter has been considered by the statutory tribunal or not.

17. For the reasons aforementioned, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions, which are accordingly dismissed with costs. Counsel's fee assessed at Rs. 1000/- (Rupees one thousand only).