The definition of "coal mine" in S. 2 (b) of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Bonus Schemes Act, 1948 should be interpreted to mean that all works, machinery, tramways, and sidings are included in the definition only if they belong to the coal mine.

Judgement

RAMASWAMI, J. : The question of law presented for determination in this appeal is whether the respondent - S. K. Roy - is the owner of a coal mine within the meaning of S. 2 (b) and 2 (e) of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Bonus Schemes Act, 1948 (Act 46 of 1948), hereinafter called the Act .

2. The respondent was prosecuted under para 70 of the Coal Mines Provident Fund Scheme (hereinafter called the Scheme ) for violation of Cls. (a), (d) and (f) of paragraph 70 read with paragraphs 33-A, 38, 42 and 69-A of the scheme. An Inspector appointed under the Act filed a complaint against the respondent alleging that he was the owner of the Bhowra Coke Plant and that he had contravened certain provisions of the Scheme. It was alleged that the respondent had failed to pay the contribution for the Provident Fund, both employer s and employees from April, 1960 to November, 1960 and had failed to submit returns in Form "H" with corresponding declaration in Form "A" and the statement in Form P as provided under the Regulations. The respondent was held guilty by the trying Magistrate and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500 and, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment under paragraph 70 (a). The respondent went in appeal to the Sessions Judge, who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the sentence imposed by the Magistrate. The respondent filed a Revision Application in the Patna High Court which allowed the Revision Application and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the respondent holding that the Coke Plant owned by the respondent was not a Coal Mine within the meaning of the Scheme and that the coke plant was not subject to the provisions of the Scheme and the respondent was not the owner of the mine within the meaning of the Act and the Scheme.

3. The facts found or admitted in this case are: (1) The Bhowra Coke Plant originally belonged to the Bhowra Group of collieries owned by the Eastern Coal Company, but subsequently in or about the years 1945 to 1947 the Coke Plant was transferred by sale to the respondent., (2) The group of Bhowra Collieries was subsequently sold to the Bhowra Kankanee Collieries Limited., (3) The respondent is the owner of the Coke Plant and the lessee of the land on which it stands on payment of certain royalty by way of the ground rent for the land, the lessor, at the relevant time, being the Bhowra Kankanee Collieries Limited owning the coal mine and coal field area, where the Bhowra coal Mines are and the Coke Plant is situated., (4) The Coke Plant is not only adjacent to the coal mine but is also situated on the surface land, which forms part of the coal fields which and beneath which the coal mine is worked by the Bhowra Kankanee Collieries Ltd., (5) The respondent does not carry on the work of any coal mine therein, he does not excavate any coal by carrying on any operation for the purpose of obtaining coal., (6) The Coke Plant is a bye-product coke plant in which hard coke as well as some other bye-products are manufactured.

4. The question to be considered is whether, in this state of facts, the respondent is the owner of a coal mine within the meaning of the Act and the Scheme.

5. Under S. 2 (e) of the Act the expression "Employer" means "the owner of a coal mine as defined in clause (g) of S. 3 of the Indian Mines Act, 1923". The Indian Mines Act, 1923 has been repealed and substituted by the Mines Act, 1952 (Act 35 of 1952). In the latter Act the word owner has been defined in Cl. (1) of S. 2. By virtue of S. 8 of the General Clauses Act, the definition of the word "Employer" in Cl. (e) of S. 2 of the Act should be construed with reference to the definition of the word "owner" in Cl. (1) of S. 2 of Act 35 of 1952, which repealed the earlier Act and re-enacted it (See also the decision of this Court in State of Uttar Pradesh v. M. P. Singh etc., AIR 1960 SC 569). According to S. 2 (1) of Act 35 of 1952 the word "owner", when used in relation to a mine, means