JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J. 1. Members of the petitioners Samiti are residents of Kufri and Chharbara. They are supplied water by respondent No. 3 Municipal Corporation, Shimla. Respondent-State has issued notification dated 6.10.2013 under Section 170 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for brevity sake) revising the rates of water supply within and outside the areas of Municipal Corporation with immediate effect. These rates were to be increased @ 10% every year. Respondent-Corporation vide resolutions dated 29.9.2012, 28.2.2013, 15.3.2013 and 29.3.2013 has revised the water rates for domestic water connections within and outside the areas of Municipal Corporation. 2. Mr. Ajay Sharma has vehemently argued that water charges are to be fixed by the State Government and the Municipal Corporation, Shimla has no authority to do so. 3. Mr. Anup Rattan, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent No. 1 and 2 and Mr. Hamender Chandel, Advocate for respondent No. 3, have vehemently argued that the Municipal Corporation has the authority to prescribe the water charges under newly substituted section 85 of the Act. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings carefully. 5. Chapter-VIII of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 deals with the taxes and fees. Un-amended section 85 of the Act reads as under:- "85. (1) Subject to the prior approval of the State Government the Corporation may in the manner prescribed, levy a fee with regard to the following – (i) A fee on advertisements other than advertisements in the newspapers. (ii) A fee on building applications. (iii) Development fee for providing and maintaining civic amenities in certain areas. (iv) A fee with regard to lighting. (v) A fee with regard to scavenging. (vi) A fee in the nature of costs for providing internal services in a building scheme or town planning scheme. (vii) Any other fee as deemed fit by the corporation for services rendered. 2. The rates at which and the conditions subject to which the fees as laid down in sub-section (1), may be levied by the Corporation, would be decided by the Government." 6. Section 85 was substituted vide Act No. 32 of 2011. According to the reply filed by respondent No. 1, amendment was carried out with effect from 20.2.2012. 7. Mr. The rates at which and the conditions subject to which the fees as laid down in sub-section (1), may be levied by the Corporation, would be decided by the Government." 6. Section 85 was substituted vide Act No. 32 of 2011. According to the reply filed by respondent No. 1, amendment was carried out with effect from 20.2.2012. 7. Mr. Ajay Sharma has drawn the attention of the Court to sub-section (2) of section 170 of the Act. Section 170 reads as under: "170. Supply of water to connected premises. (1) The Commissioner may, on application by the owner of any building arrange for supplying water from the nearest main to such building for domestic purposes in such quantities as he deems reasonable, and may at any time limit the amount of water to be supplied whenever he considers necessary. (2) Apart from the charges for the domestic supply at rates as may be fixed by the Government, additional charges will be payable for the following supplies of water:- (a) For animals or for washing vehicles where such animals or vehicles are kept for sale or hire. (b) For any trade, manufacture or business. (c) For fountains, swimming baths, or for any ornamental or mechanical purposes. (d) For gardens or for purposes of irrigation. (e) For watering loads and paths. (f) For building purposes." 8. Sub-section (2) of section 170 is contained in Chapter-XII of the Act. Section 170 is a charging section and specifically provides that the rates of the domestic supply shall be fixed by the Government. Section 85 is general and empowers the Corporation to levy a fee and user charges for the services provided by it at such rates and in such manner as may be determined by the Corporation from time to time. Provisions of sub-section (2) of section 170 of the Act exclude the applicability of section 85 contained in Chapter-VIII. Earlier rates as per notification dated 6.10.2003 were also prescribed by the State Government. 9. Mr. Hamender Chandel has also drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure R-3/A dated 19.2.2014 whereby the State Government has conveyed the ex-post facto approval to water tariff approved by the Municipal Corporation vide resolution No. 3 (II) dated 29.9.2012. The water tariff/charges are to be fixed by the State Government and the Corporation had no authority to pass the resolution. The water tariff/charges are to be fixed by the State Government and the Corporation had no authority to pass the resolution. Since the resolution was in contravention of the mandatory provisions of section 170 (2) of the Act, there was no occasion for the State Government to grant ex-post facto sanction to the resolution dated 29.9.2012. Section 85 has been substituted, as noticed hereinabove with effect from 20.2.2012, but there is no corresponding amendment in sub-section (2) of section 170 of the Act. 10. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Annexure P-5 and P-6 are quashed and set aside. However, it shall be open to the respondent-State to fix the rates of water charges henceforth in accordance with law. Pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of. No costs.