Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J.

Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.862/2017, WP(C) No.930/2017, WP(C) No.931/2017, WP(C) No.933/2017 and WP(C) No.934/2017 as well as Mr. K.D. Chetry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) No.1234/2017. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Senior Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State of Assam.

2. All the writ petitions involve a common question of facts and law as to whether the PWD while releasing the payment of bills of the contractors who works under the department are entitled to deduct the component of forest royalty, that may be payable to the Forest Department. The expression forest royalty is understood to mean the royalty that is required to be paid in respect of any mineral removed or consumed from a mining leased area. Such minor minerals also include stone and sand that are required for the construction works undertaken by the respondent PWD.

3. Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 provides that the holder of a mining lease granted before the commencement of the Act shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the instrument of lease or in any law in force at commencement, pay royalty in respect of any mineral removed or consumed by him or by his agent, manager, employee, contractor or sub-leesee from the leased area after such commencement, at the rate for the time being specified in the second schedule in respect of that mineral. The implication of provision of Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals Act 1957 is that in respect of any minor mineral that may be extracted and removed from the mining leased area the amount specified as royalty, is to be paid to the concerned authorities.

4. In the State of Assam, such mining leased areas are within the control and authority of the Directorate of Geology and Mining and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest. Accordingly, it is understood that such royalty has to be paid to the Forest Department by the mining lease holder. Subsequently, the mining mineral products are purchased from the mining lease holder by the dealers and retailers and it is stated that while transporting the mining minerals from the mining lease holder to such dealers, including the retailers, at different levels, certain challans are issued under the authority of the Forest Department. When the retailer sells such minor minerals to the ultimate consumers, it is expected that such retailer has in its possession the required challans etc., which were issued under the authority of the Forest Department. Once the ultimate consumer purchases the minor minerals from the retailer and the retailer issues a purchase voucher for the purpose, it can be understood that such minerals have been purchased from the genuine and authentic source and if necessary, any authority can verify its authenticity by referring the matter to the Forest Department and obtain its view on the same.

5. In this bunch of writ petitions, the act on the part of the respondent PWD has been assailed, whereby, a component called forest royalty, which is in fact a royalty on the mining minerals that may have been used by the contractors in performing the contract work, is sought to be deducted from the final bills payable to the contractors. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners that such act on the part of the respondents PWD is unauthorized and contrary to the provision of law, inasmuch as, the contractors having purchased the minor minerals products from the authentic retail sources, it is to be understood that the required royalty had been paid, initially by the mining mineral lease holder. In this respect, Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned senior counsel for the PWD relies upon a Office Memorandum dated 17.06.2000 of Govt. of Assam Finance Department, wherein, it is provided that the bills of the contractors engaged in construction works of Government departments and using