JUDGMENT Hon’ble Amitava Lala, ACJ.—This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are engaged in the business of transporting of various petroleum products of the Indian Oil Corporation. On the basis of the tender, a contract was awarded in their favour by the Indian Oil Corporation. However, the tankers owned by petitioners are coming with different colours to identify a particular product. These vehicle or vehicles are carrying out Xtra Mile Super Diesel and Xtra Premium Petrol. 2. Mr. Rahul Agarwal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has contended before us that whenever vehicles carry the products to the concerned Cantonment Board area, the Board is levying toll tax of Rs. 100/- in the place and instead of Rs. 15/-. He has drawn our attention to the gazette notification dated 2nd October, 2004, wherein a schedule has been given for toll tax on the vehicles laden with goods or passengers entering or passing through Babina Cantonment, district Jhansi. The said schedule of the tax is as follows : "A toll tax on vehicles laden with goods or passengers entering or passing through Babina Cantonment : Sl.No. Type of Vehicles Toll Tax 1. Laden Bus — Rs. 15.00 2. Laden Truck — Rs. 15.00 3. Laden Auto Rickshaw — Rs. 5.00 4. Laden Tractor with carrier trolly — Rs. 10.00 5. Laden Advertisement Car Vehicle — Rs. 100.00 6. Laden Matadore — Rs. 10.00 Provided that no toll tax as aforesaid shall be levied on vehicles belonging to— (a) the Government of India or any State Government carrying goods certified to be the property of that Government; (b) the Cantonment Board carrying goods certified to be the property of Cantonment Board; (c) vehicle carrying solely funeral parties; (d) vehicles belonging to the persons and property exempted under section 3 of the Indian Tolls (Army and Air Force) Act, 1901 (2 of 1901).” 3. The contention of Mr. Agarwal is that since the truck is carrying petroleum products, the toll tax would have been charged at the rate of Rs. 15/- per laden truck but the Cantonment Board is charging Rs. 100/- from one laden truck as laden advertisement car vehicle. To that, he argued that under no circumstances the truck or tanker carrying fuel of the Indian Oil Corporation should be treated to be a laden advertisement Car vehicle for imposing Rs. 100/- as toll tax. 15/- per laden truck but the Cantonment Board is charging Rs. 100/- from one laden truck as laden advertisement car vehicle. To that, he argued that under no circumstances the truck or tanker carrying fuel of the Indian Oil Corporation should be treated to be a laden advertisement Car vehicle for imposing Rs. 100/- as toll tax. He said that no contract has been made for advertisement and no consideration has been made in connection thereto for payment of toll tax at the rate of Rs. 100/- per vehicle. Mere identification of petroleum products cannot ipso facto give a cause for realisation of toll tax of Rs. 100/- in the place and instead of Rs. 15/-. He has frankly confessed before us that no such case is available in the similar line, therefore, he wanted to get a meaning of the word “advertisement” or “advertising” from Encyclopedia Britannica, Words & Phrases, West Publishing Co. and Advanced Law Lexicon. By and large, he wanted to say that the meaning of the word “advertising” is a form of paid public announcement intended to promote the sale of a commodity or service, to advance an idea or to bring about some other effect desired by the advertiser. The import of saying so, as we have understood, is that neither the transporter has been paid for public announcement nor intended to promote the sale of a commodity or service by using word Xtra Mile Super Diesel and Xtra Premium Petrol on the body of the truck as what type of products it is carrying. 4. On the other hand, Mr. S.K. Chaturvedi, learned Counsel, has argued on behalf of the Cantonment Board that if such logo of Indian Oil Corporation is being used on the vehicles, it does not show the intention of a particular sale advertisement. The whole intention is to promote the idea of using Xtra Mile Super Diesel and Xtra Premium Petrol, which is Xtra Mile Super Diesel and Xtra Premium Petrol. He has drawn our attention to Annexure-2 to the Counter-affidavit by saying that in the Wikipedia the pictures are given showing the types of advertisement with human body, on the road, bus and railway station, therefore, this type of painting billboards cannot be said to be not an advertisement. He further said that commercial advertising media includes all such components. To which, Mr. He further said that commercial advertising media includes all such components. To which, Mr. Agarwal said that there are two judgments of the Supreme Court in which it has been categorically held that Wikipedia is not an authentic source of information and cannot be relied upon. He has referred paragraph 17 of the judgment in Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore v. Acer India (P) Ltd.), (2008) 1 SCC 382 , which is as follows: “We have referred to Wikipedia, as the learned counsel for the parties relied thereupon. It is an online encyclopedia and information can be entered therein by any person and as such it may not be authentic. However, it is not disputed that a laptop and a desktop are differently known in commercial parlance. Furthermore, we are required to dertermine this issue on interpretation of the relevant entries contained in the Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act.” 5. He also relied upon paras 41 to 43 of the judgment in Ponds India Limited (Merged with H.L.Limited) v. Commissioner of Trade Tax, Lucknow, (2008) 8 SCC 369 . 6. Mr. Chaturvedi, further contended before us that the intention of Wikipedia is not to show whether it is authentic source of information or not, it cannot be read to fit the purpose of the petitioners that it is the laden truck and not laden advertisement Car vehicle. However, he insisted that as per Section 60 of the Cantonments Act, 1924, toll tax has been imposed. We have gone through Sections 60 to 63 of the Act which speak about general power of taxation, framing of preliminary proposals, objections and disposal of the same and imposition of tax. Therefore, there is no dearth of power of the Cantonment Board to impose the toll tax. The latest gazette notification dated 2nd October, 2004 is outcome of the same. 7. Against this background, the Court was compelled to ask Mr. Charturvedi to explain as to whether any recent development on the road or bridge has been done and for maintenance of which the toll is required to be paid by the vehicle owners. To that, he answered that no bridge is involved therein but for the purpose of making entry in the Cantonment Board and for the purpose of providing facility to the career of the vehicle, toll tax is being imposed. To that, he answered that no bridge is involved therein but for the purpose of making entry in the Cantonment Board and for the purpose of providing facility to the career of the vehicle, toll tax is being imposed. We are of the clear view that the toll tax, as such, is not a tax but the compensatory tax, which is an outcome of regulatory power and as such it is product of judicial intervention. This type of compensatory taxes are provided when the services are being rendered and as such minimal amount of tax is being imposed for a periodical recovery and after that it is necessarily withdrawn, being temporary phase. There is no concept known to this Court for an indefinite toll tax. In case there is any necessity on account of security of the Cantonment Board, the Board is entitled to stop the vehicles to make necessary enquiry and inspection then that vehicles will be allowed to enter into a particular area. But unless and until the Cantonment Board has shown that the services have been rendered or provided and to recover the same the toll tax has been imposed it will not be feasible to collect toll. However, the Board is not entitled to do so for ever. It is highly illegal action on the part of such authority. Government body cannot enrich unjustly. For construction of the road or for any service provided, the Board is being funded by Defence Ministry without any direction for realisation of toll tax, therefore, the Cantonment Board cannot recover the same from the vehicle as toll. Even if such direction is there, that cannot continue indefinitely. 8. In the instant case, no such answer is available. Mr. Chaturvedi is only harping on the nature of the painting of the tanker. 9. A further issue which was expected to be addressed before us and was not done, is the issue of the nomenclature and specification of the vehicles “laden truck” and “laden advertisement” Car vehicle. Under no stretch of imagination, tanker will be considered as laden advertisement Car vehicle. Therefore, though the issue has not been raised, however, by way of necessary implication it arose before us. Under no stretch of imagination, tanker will be considered as laden advertisement Car vehicle. Therefore, though the issue has not been raised, however, by way of necessary implication it arose before us. However, at the end another issue as to whether the Court will be able to give directions to the respondents that what money they are collecting as toll tax cannot be recovered from the petitioners but whenever the petroleum products are carried by the transporters, they will come under item No. 2 of the Schedule for imposition of “laden truck”. We shall also propose that there should be a policy decision of the Central Government, Ministry of Defence if it is forwarded by the Cantonment Board which is contesting respondent before us that in view of the settled principle of law whether toll tax can be realised indefinitely in the manner they are proposing but we cannot go to such extent. Inspite of such order, if the authority concerned wanted to defeat the cause, the petitioners will be able to refer the dispute to the authority concerned under Section 62 of the Act or before the Court of contempt for non-compliance. The writ petition is disposed of. 10. No order is passed as to costs. Hon’ble Ashok Srivastava, J.—I agree. ————