Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. RANGANATHAN, N.M. KASLIWAL AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.
M /s. Orissa Cement Ltd. Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa, and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 4353 -54 of 1983 ,2053 -80 of 1980 ,592 of1986 ,1574 and 1575 of 1991, IA No. 1 (in SLP No. 6317 of 1991 Civil Appeal No. 1576 of 1991 ,1640 -62 of 1986
Decided on 4-4-1991
WITH
M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., Appellant
Versus
The State of Orissa and others, Respondents.
WITH
M/s. Tata lron and Steel Co. Ltd., Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar and others, Respondents.
Tamil Nadu Act - Orissa Mining Areas Development Fund Act, 1952 – Swction 3 and 5(2) - Orissa Cess Act (Orissa Act II of 1962) as amended by Act 42 of 1976- Section 96 - Local Mines Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1947 - Assessment of cess on lands held for mining operations - Annual Value - Rate of cess, assessment (and) fixation of cess year - Validity of levy of a "cess", based on royalty - Mining lands - Challenged in these petitions and appeals. A seven Judge Bench of this Court in India Cement (1990) 1 SCC 12 struck down a similar levy under a Tamil Nadu Act as beyond legislative competence of the State Legislature - Assessees, in matters now before us, claim that issue here is directly and squarely governed by the above decision - States, on the other hand, claim that the nature and character of the levies imposed by them is totally different from that of Tamil Nadu levy and that they are entirely within scope of States Legislative powers under the Constitution - This is the issue to be decided in these matters - As impugned enactments of Bihar, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh mutually differ from one another in some respects, they will need separate consideration - However, basic issue being the same, all these matters have been heard together and it is found convenient to dispose of them all by this common judgment - We may mention in passing that, initially, these matters were listed before a Bench of two Judges of this Court - It referred matters on 17-8-1990 to the learned Chief Justice for the constitution of a larger bench - Held, Court opinion that, though levy of cess was unconstitutional, there shall be no direction to refund to assessees of any amounts of cess collected until date on which levy in question has been declared unconstitutional - This, in regard to Bihar cases, will be date of this judgment. In respect of Orissa, relevant date will be 22-12-1989 on which date, High Court, following India Cement declared levy by State Legislature unconstitutional - In respect of Madhya -Pradesh, relevant date will be the date of the judgment in Hiralal Ramswarup and connected cases (viz. M.P. 410/ 83 decided on 28-3-1986) in respect of levy under State Act 15 of 1982 - It is submitted that the condition imposed, or undertakings given, to this effect and recorded at time of passing interim orders in various cases should be implemented - Interim undertakings or directions cannot be understood in such a manner as to conflict with our final decision on writ petitions set out above. But we agree that, to extent refunds of amounts of cess collected after relevant dates are permissible on the basis indicated by us, State should refund those amounts to the assessees directly or to Coalfields from whom they were collected, with interest at the rate directed by this Court or mentioned in undertaking from date of the relevant judgment to actual date of repayment - Appeals are disposed of.
JUDGMENT
RANGANATHAN, J.:—These are connected batches of civil appeals and special leave petitions. We grant special leave to appeal in all the petitions (condoning the delay in the filing of the unnumbered one referred to below) and proceed to dispose of all the appeals by this common judgment. The details of the appeals and petitions are, for sake of convenient reference, tabulated below:
High Court Date of Civil Appeal/ Name of
judgment S.L.P. Nos. Appellant
1. Orissa 17-4-1980 C.A. 2053-2080/80 Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.
7-3-1983 C.A. 4353-4354/83 Orissa Cement Ltd.
22-12-1989 S.L.P. 1479/90 State of Orissa
22-12-1989 S. L. P. /90 Orient Paper & Industries Ltd. & Anr.
13-7-1990 S. O. P. 11939/90 -do-
2. Bihar 10-2-1986 C.A. 592/86 Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.
3. Madhya Pradesh 28-3-1986 C.A. 1641-1662/86 State of M. P.
2. We shall discuss later the manner in which these appeals and petitions have arisen.
THE ISSUE
3. The validity of the levy of a "cess", based on the royalty derived from mining lands, by the States of Bihar, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh is challenged in these petitions and appeals. A seven Judge Bench of this Court in India Cement (1990) 1 SCC 12 struck down a similar levy under a Tamil Nadu Act as beyond the legislative competence of the State Legislature. The assessees, in the matters now before us, claim that the issue here is directly and squarely governed by the above decision. The States, on the other hand, claim that the nature and character of the levies imposed by them is totally different from that of the Tamil Nadu levy and that they are entirely within the scope of the States Legislative powers under the Constitution. This is the issue to be decided in these matters. As the impugned enactments of Bihar, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh mutually differ from one another in some respects, they will need separate consideration. However, the basic issue being the same, all these matters have been heard together and it is found convenient to dispose of them all by this common judgment. We may mention in passing that, initially, these matters were listed before a Bench of two Judges of this Court. It referred the matters on 17-8-1990 to the learned Chief Justice for the constitution of a larger bench. The matters have come up before us in pursuance of the directions of the Honble Chief Justice.
THE LEGISLATIVE ENTRIES
4. It will be convenient, at the outset, to refer to the various entries of the Union and the State Lists in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution which have a bearing on the issues to be discussed. These are:
List I - (Union List)
Entry 52:
Industries, the control of which by the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest.
Entry 54:
Regulation of mines and mineral development to the extent to which such regulation and development under the control of Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest.
List II - (State List)
Entry 18
Land, that is to say, rights in or over land, land tenures including the relation of landlord and tenant, and the collection of rents; transfer and alienation of agricultural land; land improvement and agricultural land; colonization.
Entry 23
Regulation of mines and mineral development subject to the provisions of List I with respect to regulation and development under the control of the Union.
Entry 45
Land revenue, including the assessment and collection of revenue, the maintenance of land records, survey for revenue purposes and records of rights, and alienation of revenues.
Entry 49
Taxes on lands and buildings.
Entry 50 :
Taxes on mineral rights subject to any limitations imposed by Parliament by law relating to mineral development.
Entry 66
Fees in respect of any of the matters in this List, but not including fees taken in anyCourt.
EARLIER HISTORY
5. Before proceeding reconsider the provisions of the enactments impugned, and the issues debated, before us, it is necessary to set out certain earlier controversies that led t
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
