ORDER :

We have heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on 30th October 2019. As a request was made by her for grant of time, we did not dispose of the petition and adjourned the petition till today.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has sought permission to make further submissions today which we have allowed. Accordingly, we have also heard the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

FACTS:

3. The petitioner claims that it is a largest integrated steel plant in the country. It appears that the petitioner applied for allotment of additional land for the benefit of the said project. On the basis of the order dated 11th March 2011 passed by the State Government, the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (in short ‘the said Board’) allotted land measuring 629.92 acres for creation of impounding reservoir as a single unit project. A letter dated 07th April 2015 addressed by the said Board provided that a lease will be granted for a period of 99 years subject to the conditions stated in the letter. On the basis of the said allotment, the lease was executed by the said Board on 10th April 2015 in favour of the petitioner in respect of area of 629.92 acres for a period of 99 years.

4. Thereafter, there was a correspondence made by petitioner by addressing letters to various authorities. In the said letters, the petitioner pointed out that the work of construction of water reservoir will be purely of earthen embarkment. The request made by the petitioner was for permitting excavation and re-use of soil for construction of earthen dyke on the said area of 629.29 acres. The Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district, by a communication dated 29th November 2019, requested the Secretary to the Government to grant permission for utilization of minor mineral being excavated during the execution of work of water reservoir on payment of royalty. On 12th April 2017, the Secretary to the Government addressed a letter to the Director of Mines and Geology Department granting permission to use minor minerals excavated during the construction in the land which is acquired through the said Board.

5. A work order was issued on 04th October 2017 by the Government of Karnataka granting permission for use of Mines and other minor minerals excavated through the use of water reservoir subject to conditions incorporated in the said work order. On 24th May 2017, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.4,00,00,000/- by cheque to the Deputy Director of the Department of Mines and Geology by way of advance payment of royalty charges for use of minor minerals for construction of artificial water reservoir.

6. The challenge in the writ petition as originally filed was to the condition No.1 in work order dated 04th October 2017 (Annexure-C). The second prayer in the alternative was a declaration that Rule 3A and Rule 36 of the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1994 (for short ‘the said rules’) do not empower the respondents to levy royalty on minerals excavated for consumption. Later on, an application for amendment being I.A.No.2/2019 was filed seeking amendment for addition of certain paragraphs and adding grounds and for deleting the first prayer where challenge was incorporated to the first condition in the aforesaid work order. The same was allowed. A prayer was added by way of amendment claiming a declaration that the collection of royalty by the respondents on minerals excavated in the land which are used for construction of artificial tank is without authority of law.

SUBMISSIONS:

7. On the earlier date, the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant was that Rule-3A of the said Rules which grants exemption from obtaining quarrying lease or licence and from provisions of sub-rule 1-A of Rule 8 of the said Rules would squarely apply. It was urged that Rule 3A which applies for digging of wells for water will apply as digging for construction of tank will amount to constr