JUDGMENT H.N. Seth, Actg. C.J. - Petitioner, M/s Agra Engineering Industries which is a unit of M/s Jay Engineering Works Ltd. claims that it carries on the business of manufacturing electric fans at Agra. The Cess Officer, U.P. Water Pollution Prevention and Control Board visited and surveyed petitioner's establishment on 26th, 27th and 28th July, 1979. The petitioner, vide its letter dated 29th July, 1979 addressed to the Cess Officer, claimed that as. its establishment did not fall in any of the categories specified in Sch. I of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Cess Act 1977), the provisions contained therein were not applicable to it. On 20th Aug. 1979 the Cess Officer wrote to the petitioner inviting its attention to the provisions of S. 5 of the Cess Act 1977 and advising it to furnish the requisite return and pay the cess due from it. The Cess Officer, vide communication dated 22-6-1977, further informed the petitioner that in his opinion petitioner's unit was covered under category 1 of Sch. I of the Act and that it should pay the water cess accordingly. The letter also mentioned that petitioner's case was being referred to Central Board for further clarification and that if it was decided that it did not come within the purview of the Act the cess paid by it would be refunded without any hesitation. The petitioner once again, vide its letter dated 6-9-1979, refuted the claim made by the Cess Officer and urged thus : "The classification of the various industries is in the first Schedule of Industries (Development & Regulation) Act 1951 and under that Schedule, electric fan industry is classified under 'Electric Equipment Industries' under item No. 5 of the first Schedule of the above Act. Since Electric Equipment Industries are not convered under Schedule I of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Cess Act 1977, we are not covered under the above Act. For your ready reference we are enclosing herewith a copy of the first Schedule of Industries (Development & Regulation) Act 1951. In view of the above we hope you will agree that our factory is not covered under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Cess Act. We are, therefore, not taking any action in the matter". 2. For your ready reference we are enclosing herewith a copy of the first Schedule of Industries (Development & Regulation) Act 1951. In view of the above we hope you will agree that our factory is not covered under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Cess Act. We are, therefore, not taking any action in the matter". 2. The Cess Officer vide his letter dated 3-10-1979 informed the petitioner that he still maintained that petitioner's establishment is covered by the provisions of the Cess Act and advised it to furnish the requisite returns at once. Aggrieved the petitioner has approached this Court for relief under Article 226 of the Constitution. It prays that the respondents be restrained from enforcing the provisions of the Cess Act against it and the two notices dated 20-8-1979 and 3-10-1979 requiring the petitioner to file requisite returns under the Cess Act and to pay the same be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made following three submissions for questioning the right of the respondents to enforce the provisions of Cess Act against it :- (i) The Cess Act is enacted by the Parliament beyond its legislative competence and is invalid. (ii) In the context of the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the provision for cess under the Cess Act; 1977 partakes the. nature of fee. In absence of quid pro quo, the impost is invalid. (iii) Petitioner's industry not being an industry of the nature specified in Schedule I of the Cess Act, the provisions contained in. the Act cannot be applied to it. Initiation of any proceeding against the petitioner under the Cess Act is, therefore, illegal and without jurisdiction. 4. In pursuance of resolution passed by State Legislature of 12 States which did not include State of U.P. the Parliament, in exercise of its power under Article 252 of the Constitution enacted Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. A perusal of the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the said Act shows that it was enacted with a view to prevent and control water pollution and maintaining or restoring the wholesomeness of water. The Act provided for the establishment of boards for the prevention of water pollution and also conferred and assigned to such boards powers and functions relating thereto. The Act provided for the establishment of boards for the prevention of water pollution and also conferred and assigned to such boards powers and functions relating thereto. So far as the State of Uttar Pradesh is concerned it issued a notification dated 3-2-1975 mentioning therein that the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council had, in pursuance of clause I of Article 252 of the Constitution, passed resolution on 6th and 7th Aug. 1974 respectively to adopt the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (Act No. 6 of 1974) and that the Governor was pleased to notify that the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 had come into force in the State with effect from the date of the resolution. 5. In due course the Central Government constituted the Central Board and various State Governments constituted State Boards to perform the duties and functions as provided in the Act. The Central Government and the State Government were required to provide funds to the Central Board and State Boards for prevention and control of water pollution and for implementing the provisions of the Act. However, due to pressure of limited resources, the State Governments were not in a position to provide adequate funds to the State Boards for their effective functioning. Accordingly it was proposed to levy a cess on local authorities which were entrusted with the duty of supplying water under the law by or under which they were constituted and on certain specified industries. The cess was proposed to be levied on the basis of water consumed by such local authorities and the industries. Accordingly the Parliament enacted the Cess Act 1977 applicable to various States where the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 was in force, enabling thereby the concerned State Government to collect cess and to pay the same to the Central Government, which after due appropriation made by the Parliament was to pay, having regard to the amount of cess collected by State Governments, such sums of money as it thought fit to the Central and the State Boards. 6. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that having regard to the object of the enactment of Cess Act 1977 as described above, it is clear that both the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Cess Act 1977 are legislations which operate in the same field. Admittedly the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, concerns itself with the legislative field pertaining to State List (List II of VII Sch. of the Constitution) and not to the field in which the Parliament has been, under List I of VII Sch. of the Constitution, enabled to legislate, and this is why for authorising the Parliament to make the legislation, the provisions of Article 252 of the Constitution had been, at the instance of certain State Legislatures, invoked. Inasmuch as the State of Uttar Pradesh did not, under Article 252 of the Constitution, authorise the Parliament to enact the Cess Act of 1977, the said enactment cannot be enforced in that State. 7. In our opinion. aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel, proceeds on a wrong assumption viz, that the power to enact the Cess Act, 1977 flows from the same legislative entry in List II of the VII Sch. of the Constitution which enables the State Legislature and with the aid of Article 252 of the Constitution the Parliament to enact the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974. 8. It is petitioner's own case that the cess imposed by the Cess Act 1977 is a compulsory exaction which has no nexus with the services rendered by the Central or the State Boards. The respondents also do not claim that there is any quid pro quo between the amount of cess collected under the Act and the services which are rendered to payer of the ce Clearly the Cess Act, 1977 has been enacted for the purposes of augmenting the State revenues so as to enable it to meet the expenses incurred in connection with the functioning of the Central and the State Boards established under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. The imposition, therefore, clearly partakes the nature of a tax and cannot be treated to be fees. 9. Entry No. 97 of List I of VII Sch. The imposition, therefore, clearly partakes the nature of a tax and cannot be treated to be fees. 9. Entry No. 97 of List I of VII Sch. which runs thus "Any other matter not enumerated in List II or List III including any tax not mentioned in either of those lists," authorises the Parliament to legislate and provide for any tax which a State legislature is under List II of VII Sch. not competent to impose. Of course if the Cess Act of 1977 falls within the ambit of any of the entries in List III of VII Sch., its enactment by the Parliament would be justified under that very entry and it will not be necessary to have recourse to entry No. 97 of List I of VII Schedule. 10. Main question, therefore, that arises for consideration is as to whether as per List II of VII Sch. of the Constitution the State legislature has any jurisdiction to impose water cess of the nature mentioned in the Cess Act of 1977. 11. A perusal of various entries in List 11 of VII Sch. shows that the State Legislature has been empowered to legislate in respect of taxes and duties specified in items Nos, 46 (Taxes on agricultural income), 47 (Duties in respect of succession to agricultural land), 48 (Estate duty in respect of agricultural land), 49 (Taxes on lands and buildings), 50 (Taxes on mineral rights), 51 (Duties of excise), 52 (Taxes on the entry of goods into a local area), 53 (Taxes on the consumption or sale of electricity), 54 (Taxes on the sale or purchase of goods other than newspapers), 55 (Taxes on advertisement other than advertisements published in the newspapers), 56 (Taxes on goods and passengers carried by road or on inland-waterways), 57 (Tax on vehicles), 58 (Taxes on animals and boats), 59 (Tolls), 60 (Taxes on professions, trades, callings and employments), 61 (Capital taxes), 62 (Taxes on Luxuries). 63 (Rates of stamp duty). It is obvious that cess of the nature contemplated by the Cess Act 1977 is not covered by any of the aforementioned legislative entries. The State legislature is accordingly not competent to legislate in respect thereof. The jurisdiction to legislate in respect of such a cess, therefore vests in the Parliament under entry No. 97 of List I of VII Sch. of the Constitution. 12. The State legislature is accordingly not competent to legislate in respect thereof. The jurisdiction to legislate in respect of such a cess, therefore vests in the Parliament under entry No. 97 of List I of VII Sch. of the Constitution. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that inasmuch as the enactment of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 falls within the purview of items Nos. 5, 6 and 17 of List II of VII Sch. the State Legislature is under entry No. 66 competent to legislate and make provisions for imposition of fees in respect of any matter covered by the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. The impugned cess having been imposed for the purposes enumerated in entries Nos. 5, 6 and 17 of List II falls within the powers and ambit of the State legislature under entry No. 66 of List II of VII Sch. (Fee in respect of any of the matters in this list, but not including fees taken in any Court) and not within the ambit of legislative powers of the Parliament. We may for the purposes of this case assume that the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 fells within the purview of Entries 5, 6 and 17 of List II of VII Sch. (State list) and, therefore, as laid down in entry No. 66 a legislation providing for fees for the purposes of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 falls within the purview of the State Legislature. However, as pointed out above it is not the case of any of the two parties that the cess imposed by the Cess Act of 1977 partakes the nature of fees as contemplated by entry No. 66 of List II of VII Sch. It in fact amounts to a tax imposed by a Parliamentary legislation. Accordingly, there is nothing in List II of VII Schedule which derogates from the powers of the Parliament to enact the said Act under the authority of entry No. 97 of List I of VII Sch. of the Constitution. 13. We are accordingly of the opinion that there is no merit in first two submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Cess Act of 1977 which clearly falls within the legislative competence of the Parliament is not invalid on that account. 14. of the Constitution. 13. We are accordingly of the opinion that there is no merit in first two submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Cess Act of 1977 which clearly falls within the legislative competence of the Parliament is not invalid on that account. 14. We now proceed to consider the third question viz. whether or not the business carried on by the petitioner falls within the purview of the Cess Act of 1977. Relevant portion of S. 3 of the Cess Act 1977 runs thus: (1) There shall be levied and collected a cess for the purposes of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (6 of 1974), and utilisation thereunder. (2) The cess under sub-sec. (1) shall be payable by (a) every person carrying on any specified industry; and (b) every local authority, and shall be calculated on the basis of the water consumed by such person or local authority, as the case may be, for any of the purposes specified in Col. (1) of Sch. II, as such rate, not exceeding the rate specified in the corresponding entry in Col. (2) thereof, as the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, from time to time, specify. (3) ............................... 15. From this section it follows that it is only a local authority or a person carrying on any specified industry who falls within the ambit of the Cess Act, 1977. The expression specified industry has been defined by S. 2 of Cl. (c) of the Act as any industry specified in Sch. I. For this purpose Schedule I specifies following 15 industries : 1. Ferrous metallurgical industry. 2. Non-ferrous metallurgical industry. 3. Mining industry. 4. Ore processing industry. 5. Petroleum industry. 6. Petro-chemical industry. 7. Chemical industry. 8. Ceramic industry. 9. Cement industry. 10. Textile industry. 11. Paper industry. 12. Fertilizer industry. 13. Coal (including coke) industry. 14. Power (thermal and diesel) generating industry. 15. Processing of animal or vegetable product industry. 16. According to the petitioner it is engaged in the business of manufacturing electric fans at Agra which does not fall in the category of ferrous metallurgical industry. According to it the said industry can be more appropriately classified under the heading "electric equipment industry". Since electrical equipment industry does not find place in Sch. 16. According to the petitioner it is engaged in the business of manufacturing electric fans at Agra which does not fall in the category of ferrous metallurgical industry. According to it the said industry can be more appropriately classified under the heading "electric equipment industry". Since electrical equipment industry does not find place in Sch. I of Cess Act 1977 the petitioner is not liable to pay any water cess under the provision of the said Act. In support of his submission learned counsel for the petitioner placed strong reliance on the Schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act 1951, which, for the purpose of the Act, has classified the scheduled industries thus :- "1. Metallurgical Industries : A. Ferrous : (1) Iron and steel (metal). (2) Ferro-alloys. (3) Iron and steel castings and forgings. (4) Iron and steel structurals. (5) Iron and steel pipes. (6) Special steels. (7) Other products of iron and steel. (8) Non-ferrous : (1) Precious metals, including gold and silver, and their alloys : (1-A) Other non-ferrous metals and their alloys. (2) Semi-manufactures and manufactures. 2. to 4 ... ................ 5. Electrical Equipment : (1) Equipment for generation, transmission and distribution of -electricity including transformers. (2) Electrical Motors. (3) Electrical fans. (4) Electrical lamps. (5) Electrical furnaces. (6) Electrical cables and wires. (7) X-ray equipment. (8) Electronic equipment. (9) Household appliances such as electric I irons, heaters and the like. (10) Storage batteries. (11) Dry cells. .............................. 38 ........................ 17. In the case of Harkchand Ratanchand Banthia v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 1453 one of the questions that arose for consideration before the Supreme Court was as to whether enactment of the Gold Control Act 1968 by the Parliament, was justified under entry No. 52 of List I of VII Sch. and Entry 33 of List III of VII Schedule to the Constitution. Under entry No. 52 of List I of VII Sch. the Parliament could legislate in respect of industries, the control of which by the Union had been declared by the Parliament by law to be expedient in public interest. On behalf of the Union it was urged that manufacture of gold ornaments constituted an industry, the control whereof had been, under Industries (Development and Regulation) Act 1951, declared by Parliament to be expedient in the public interest. On behalf of the Union it was urged that manufacture of gold ornaments constituted an industry, the control whereof had been, under Industries (Development and Regulation) Act 1951, declared by Parliament to be expedient in the public interest. It was pleaded that industry carried on by manufactures of gold ornaments fell under item No. 1(B)(2). "semi-manufactures or manufacture under sub-heading B'. non ferrous under the heading metallurgical industries." While dealing with the question the Supreme Court observed thus : ".....We consider that the heading "metallurgical industry" in the schedule does not control the scope and meaning of the Entry 1-B(2)("semi-manufactures or manufactures"). The headings of the schedule do not follow any logical or scientific pattern but are put in merely as devices for convenient grouping of the industries. For example, there is no warrant for excluding electricity meters used in homes from Item 15(1) or for excluding weighing machines used at airports I or railway stations or ports from Item 15(3). There are other examples which show that the heading does not control the meaning of the industry. Thus "lubricating oils and the like" in the Item at 2(2) are clearly not "fuels" which is the heading under which they are found. Again, fire fighting equipment and appliances such as fire extinguishers used in. homes or in offices or in cinema halls or as accessories to motor cars would clearly be included in the industry Item 8-B(14). Similarly matches (Item 36(3)) is not controlled by the heading "timber products" nor is there any warrant for holding that arms and ammunition, Item 37, is controlled by the heading "defence industries". As we have already said that there is no scientific or logical scheme in the classification of first schedule of Act 65 of 1951 but it is a mere enumeration and grouping of various items. We are unable to accept the argument of petitioners that the heading metallurgical industries should be construed as having a controlling effect on the meaning of Item B(2) "semi- manufactures or manufactures". 18. It therefore, follows that Sch. I to the Industries (Development Regulation) Act 1951 has grouped certain industries under specific headings merely for the purposes of that Act and the industries included in a particular group do not take colour from the headings under which they have been so grouped. 18. It therefore, follows that Sch. I to the Industries (Development Regulation) Act 1951 has grouped certain industries under specific headings merely for the purposes of that Act and the industries included in a particular group do not take colour from the headings under which they have been so grouped. In the circumstances, it would, in our opinion, be futile to rely upon anything contained in the Schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 for the purposes of finding out as to which type of industries are intended to be covered under the category of ferrous or non-ferrous metallurgical industry as mentioned in Sch. I to the Cess Act, 1977. The argument based on the classification of industries as contained in the I Sch. to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, therefore, cannot be countenanced. 19. We have, therefore, to find out as to what is the concept of ferrous-metallurgical industry and non-ferrous metallurgical industry underlining items Nos. 1 and 2 of Sch. I of the Cess Act, 1977. As already indicated, for this purpose, any reference to the schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 will be out of place. In our opinion the expression metallurgical industry used in items Nos. 1 and 2 of Sch. I of the Act, connotes an industry engaged in production of metallurgical products. As per Chambers Twentieth Century dictionary the expression 'Metallurgy' means art and science applied to metals, including extraction from ores, refining, alloying, shaping, treating, and the study of structure, constitution, and properties. 'Metallurgical' is adjective of the word 'metallurgy' and it means pertaining to 'metallurgy'. Accordingly any industry which is engaged in producing articles as a result of shaping or treating. metals, it would be covered by the expression metallurgical industry; and if such metal happens to be ferrous it would be ferrous metallurgical industry and if it happens to be a metal other than ferrous, it would be non-ferrous metallurgical industry. This interpretation appears to be in line with the meaning given to the words "Chemical industry" under item No. 7 of the I Sch. in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. (Wvg) Co. Ltd., Mavoor v. Appellate Committee for Water Cess, Trivandrum, AIR 1983 Ker 110 . This interpretation appears to be in line with the meaning given to the words "Chemical industry" under item No. 7 of the I Sch. in the case of Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. (Wvg) Co. Ltd., Mavoor v. Appellate Committee for Water Cess, Trivandrum, AIR 1983 Ker 110 . In that case the Kerala High Court upheld the view of the Appellate Committee that the expression "chemical industry" as used in item 7 of Sch. I of the Act meant an industry where chemicals are produced. 20. We will now proceed to consider whether the petitioner's undertaking, while manufacturing electric fans, can be described either ferrous or non-ferrous metallurgical industry in the aforementioned sense of the word. 21. In the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary the word "industry" is defined as "a particular branch of productive labour, a trade or manufacture." According to Webster's Third New International Dictionary (1961 edn). the word "industry" means "(a) systematic labour especially for. the creation of value; (b) a department or branch of a craft, art, business or manufacture, a division of productive and profit making labour especially one that employs a large personnel and capital especially in manufacturing; (c) a group of productive or profit making enterprises or organisations that have a similar technological structure of production and that produce or supply technically substitutable goods, services or sources of income". It, therefore, follows that an establishment where articles are produced by a process of systematic production for trade or manufacture would, in any case, fall within the ambit of the expression industry and if such metallurgical articles are produced by a process involving alloying, shaping or treating of metals it would fall within the ambit of metallurgical industry within the meaning of items Nos. 1 and 2 of Sch. I of the Cess Act, 1977. A particular industry maybe a composite industry and while producing metallurgical goods it may also be producing for the purposes of trade, goods of any other type which may or may not fall in any of other categories of industries mentioned in Sch. I of the Act. In such a case only that part of the establishment which engages itself in production of metallurgical goods would be considered to be a metallurgical industry. 22. I of the Act. In such a case only that part of the establishment which engages itself in production of metallurgical goods would be considered to be a metallurgical industry. 22. So far as the case before us is concerned, Annexure-1 to the counter- affidavit shows that in order to determine as to whether petitioner's establishment was covered by the expression 'metallurgical industry' as used in Sch. I of the Act, the respondents had appointed an investigator who visited and inspected the petitioner's establishment on 8-4-1982. The inspection report submitted by the investigator, correctness whereof has not been questioned indicates that petitioner's establishment is being run in four distinct sections namely; A. Machine shop and lamination shop. B. Moulding shop. C. Aluminium Feeding, D. Paint shop. and the following activities are carried on in the machine shop : 1. The aluminium sheets of larger size are firstly converted into smaller strips of required size by cutting machine. The strips are then subjected to processing machine to give them proper shape of fan blades. 2. Screws and other accessories are purchased from outside. 3. Starter shafts purchased from the market are subjected to machine operation to make them suitable for use. 4. Rotors are purchased from market and are subjected to machine operation, some scraping is done to make them suitable for use. 4. Aluminium top cover ceiling fans are purchased from market and are subjected to machine operation for making holes for screws etc. 5. Cast iron casting of fan body were found to be cast in factory campus. However, the authority of industry informed the investigator that the work had been given to another party on contract basis. These castings were being given secondary machine operation in machine shop to make them suitable for use. The work carried on in the lamination shop consists of making lamination from silicon large sheets purchased from market these sheets are first converted into strips of required size by cutting. A varnish coating is given to the strips which are then subjected to machine operation to make holes on the other sphere of the spherical pieces of; silicon. 23. It will thus be seen that in the machine shop, the only metallurgical objects produced are the fan blades. A varnish coating is given to the strips which are then subjected to machine operation to make holes on the other sphere of the spherical pieces of; silicon. 23. It will thus be seen that in the machine shop, the only metallurgical objects produced are the fan blades. 'These fan blades are obtained by converting aluminium sheets into smaller strips of required size and then, subjecting them to processing machine for giving them proper shape as fan blades. The screws and other accessories that are used therein are brought from outside and they are not manufactured in petitioner's establishment. Starter shaft motors are also purchased from outside and they also are merely subjected to certain machine operations to make them suitable for use. No new metallurgical product is made out of them. Likewise the aluminium top covers of ceiling fans are also subjected to machine operations merely for making holes for fitting screws therein and no new metallurgical product is produced out of them. The report also indicates that so far as the cast iron castings of fan bodies are concerned, they are manufactured in the factory campus on contract basis and these castings are subjected to secondary machine operation in the machine shop to make them suitable for use. It is true that cast iron fan bodies are being manufactured by another party on contract basis, but they are being so manufactured inside petitioner's factory campus for and on its behalf. In the circumstances, it can be said that it is the petitioner who is getting the same manufactured within its establishment through a contractor. It thus appears that the machine shop and the place where cast iron fan bodies are manufactured by the petitioner are pon-ferrous and ferrous metallurgical articles are being produced and to this extent the petitioner is engaged in carrying non- ferrous and ferrous metallurgical industry. 24. So far as the moulding shop is concerned the products manufactured therein are canopy and regulators of fans from material other than metals and it cannot be said that any metallurgical product is being produced there. 25. In the aluminium feeding section rotors are fitted in dyes and melted aluminium is fed therein. The respondents claim that melting of aluminium in a metallurgical process and therefore, this section also constitutes metallurgical industry. We are unable to accept this submission. 25. In the aluminium feeding section rotors are fitted in dyes and melted aluminium is fed therein. The respondents claim that melting of aluminium in a metallurgical process and therefore, this section also constitutes metallurgical industry. We are unable to accept this submission. As already indicated the expression metallurgical industry in items Nos. 1 and 2 of Sch. I has been used in the sense of an industry engaged in the production of metallurgical products. Merely because during the course of manufacture an industry applies some metal to an article (which by itself is not a metallurgical product of the establishment) it does not mean that the industry becomes a metallurgical industry within the meaning of the expression metallurgical industry as used in items Nos. 1 and 2 of I Sch. For example an industry engaged in assembling radio and television sets has to melt lead for soldering and joining electric circuits. Merely because in this process lead has to be melted it cannot be said that the industry engaged in assembling radio and telivision sets becomes the metallurgical industry. 26. So far as the paint shop is concerned it merely engaged itself with painting of fan bodies and blades. Clearly it is not concerned with the production of any metallurgical product. 27. In the result, we find that the machine shop of the petitioner's establishment which is engaged in production of fan blades from aluminium sheets is to be treated as non ferrous metallurgical industry and the part of petitioner's establishment where the cast iron fan bodies are being manufactured has to be treated as ferrous metallurgical industry. The petitioner is accordingly liable to pay water cess only in respect of the water consumed by it in these two parts of its establishment in accordance with the purpose and rate enumerated in Schedule II of the Act. So far as the water consumed by the petitioner in remaining sections of its establishment is concerned, it is not liable to pay any water cess under the Act, and the respondent's action in demanding the same from the petitioner to that extent is clearly without jurisdiction. 28. In the result petition succeeds and is allowed in part. So far as the water consumed by the petitioner in remaining sections of its establishment is concerned, it is not liable to pay any water cess under the Act, and the respondent's action in demanding the same from the petitioner to that extent is clearly without jurisdiction. 28. In the result petition succeeds and is allowed in part. The petitioner shall submit requisite return and pay the cess in accordance with the provision of Cess Act, 1977 in respect of water consumed by it in its machine shop as also in the manufacture of cast iron fan bodies. The respondents shall not require the petitioner to pay water.cess in respect of remaining water consumed by it, in remaining part of its establishment. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.