A.B.N.SINHA, H.MAHAPATRA
Laddu Mal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent
Mahapatra, J.
1. In all these cases, the petitioners are brick-layers. They manufacture bricks and sell them. They were served with notices from the Assistant Mining Officer, Purnea, calling upon them to pay certain amounts of money, as royalty for the period from 1958 to 1964, during which lime they were
"engaged in manufacture and sale of bricks by using sand, earth, clay etc. which constitute minor minerals......... for which no permit or mining lease has been obtained nor any royally has been paid to Government".
Another notice from the same officer was also served on them to show cause why they should not be prosecuted under Rule 37 of the Bihar Minor Mineral (Concession Rules, 1964, as they were engaged in manufacture and sale of bricks by using sand, clay etc. which constituted minor minerals, for which no permit or mining lease had been obtained, nor any royalty had been paid to Government. The Block Development Officer also gave a notice to each of them asking them to take permit for digging earth and taking sand for manufacture of bricks and to produce accounts in respect of such manufacture.
2. The petitioners challenged all these notices, mainly on the ground th
Anand Kumar Bindal V/s. Employees State Insurance Corporation
Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras V/s. Sri Lakhmindra Thirtha Swamiar
Firm Ghulam Haji Yakoob And Sons V/s. State Of Rajasthan
Governor General In Council V/s. Province Of Madras
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.