Judgment

Madan B. Lokur, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Two sets of appeals are before us. One set of appeals pertains to the Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited (TISCO) and the other set pertains to Tata Steel.

3. In the set of appeals pertaining to TISCO, the first appeal is Civil Appeal No. 303/2004 filed by TISCO against the judgment and order dated 23rd July, 2002 passed by the Jharkhand High Court. The grievance in this appeal is that though the application of the law laid down by this court in State of Orissa v. Steel Authority of India Ltd., (1998) 6 SCC 476 (hereafter SAIL) has been accepted by the High Court, namely, that royalty is chargeable [in accordance with Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (the MMDR Act)] on the quantity of coal extracted at the pit-head, yet the refund of excess royalty paid by TISCO for the period from 10th August, 1998 (the date of the decision in SAIL) till June 2002 [about Rs.29.34 cr.] has been denied. TISCO therefore claims entitlement to refund on the excess royalty paid by it for this period.

4. Civil App