Judgement

AYYANGAR J. : These two appeals are against a common judgment of the High Court of Orissa and have been filed pursuant to a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court under Art. 132 (1) of the Constitution. They raise for consideration the question regarding the continued operation of the Orissa Mining Areas Development Fund Act (Orissa Act 27 of 1952) and the continued exigibility of the fees leviable from mine-owners under the said enactment.

2. Each of the respondents in the two appeals filed a petition before the High Court of Orissa under Art. 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus restraining the two appellants - the State of Orissa and the Administrator, Orissa Mining Areas Development Fund from applying the provisions of the Orissa Mining Areas Development Fund Act (Orissa Act 27of 1952) to the respective respondents and to direct the two appellants to cancel the notices of demand requiring the petitioners to pay the fees assessed under the said Act issued by the second appellant and for an injunction etc. restraining them from taking any steps in pursuance of the said notices of demand.

3. The facts giving rise to these positions were briefly these. There is not any material difference between the facts of the two cases and so it would be sufficient if we refer only to those in civil Appeals 561 of 1962. The respondent Tulloch and Co. Private Ltd. a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, works a manganese mine in the State of Orissa under a lease granted by that State under the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1948 (Central Act 53 of 1948) and the rules made thereunder. While the respondent was thus working these mines, the State Legislature of Orissa passed an Act called the Orissa Mining Areas Development Fund Act, 1952 (which for shortness we shall refer to as the Orissa Act) whereunder certain areas were constituted as "mining areas" and under the power conferred under that enactment the State Government was empowered to levy a fee on a percentage of the value of the mined ore at the pit s mouth, the collections being intended for the development of the "mining areas" in the State. The necessary steps for bringing these provisions into operation were taken by the State Government who thereafter made demands on the respondent on August 1, 1960 for the payment of the said fees. The present appeal is concerned with the fees which became due for the period July,1957 to March, 1958. When a demand was made for the sum the respondent filed petition 142 of 1960 before the High Court impugning the legality of the demand and claimed the reliefs we have set out earlier. The learned Judges allowed the Writ Petition and issue directions to the second appellant in terms of the prayer in the petition. As the grounds on which the said demand of the fees was impugned raised substantial questions touching the interpretation of the Constitution the appellants applied to the Court for a certificate of fitness under Art. 132 (1) and (2) and this having been granted, the appeals are now before us.

4. We shall now proceed to set out briefly the grounds upon which the learned Judges of the High Court allowed the petition of the respondents. Stated shortly, the contention which the learned Judges of the High Court accepted was that the Orissa Act had been rendered ineffective or suppressed by a Central enactment - The Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act. 1957 (Act 67 of 1957), hereinafter called the Central Act, which was brought into force as and from June 1, 1958. The Orissa Act had been enacted by virtue of the legislative power conferred by entry 23 of the State Legislative List reading "Regulation of mines and mineral development subject to the provisions of List I with reference to regulation and development under the control of the Union." The legislative entry under which the later Central Act was enacted was item 54 of the