K.S. Radhakrishnan, Ag. C.J.

The question that is posed for consideration in, this batch of cases is whether State Government has got power to demand dead rent as per R.29(1)(d) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 for the period during which minor lease was kept idle. Learned single Judge found no infirmity in the demand and dismissed the Original Petitions. Aggrieved by the same these appeals have been preferred.

2. For disposal of these cases we will refer to the facts in O.P.No.630 of 1999 against which W.A.No.148 of 2003 was filed. Petitioner is a partnership concern carrying on business of quarrying and exporting granite. By proceedings dated 14.05.1996 first respondent granted quarrying lease for extraction of granite dimension stone of M/s. Indus Granites over an extent of 6.7608 hectares in survey numbers 122/1 and 122/2 of Vandanmedu village in Udumbanchola taluk in Idukki district for a period of three years. Lease deed was executed in favour of M/s. Indus Granites on 29.05.1996. Indus Granites could not carry on quarrying operation in the above mentioned land due to financial constraints. Consequently they had sold the above mentioned property, for valuable consideration to the petitioner and requested the third respondent to transfer the quarrying lease in favour of the petitioner. The Director of Mining and Geology by proceedings dated 9.5.1997 transferred the lease granted to M/s. Indus Granites over the above extent of land in favour of the petitioner as per R.34 of the aforesaid Rules.

3. Petitioner however could not carry on the quarrying operation in the above mentioned land during-the period from 29.05.1997 to 28.05.1998. Consequently demand notice dated 25.6.1998 was issued by the third respondent directing the petitioner to remit an amount of Rs.45,648/­- towards "dead rent" for the above mentioned period. Demand was made under R.29(1)(d) of the Rules. Petitioner is aggrieved by the said demand and has preferred the Original Petition seeking a declaration that R.29(1)(d) of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 is ultra vires the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and is violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India in so far as it is made applicable to patta land. Petitioner has also sought a declaration that clause 22 of the lease deed dated 29.05.1996 is illegal and without the authority of law and also for a writ of certiorari to quash the demand notice dated 25.6.1998.

4. Counsel appearing for the petitioner Sri Joseph Kadianthara submitted that the concept of dead rent has no application to patta land since dead rent only represents the minimum royalty payable to the owner of the land in respect of lands which are the subject matter of the grant of mining permission. Counsel submitted so far as patta lands are concerned, payment of dead rent could not arise since the quarry operator is also the owner of the land. Counsel also submitted that S.9A of the Act indicates that the word "dead rent" only relates to the minimum fixed rate in the case of mining leases granted by the Government and as rules originally stood, lessees are being called upon to pay apart from area assessment, seignior age fee quantified on the basis of the mineral quarried or the dead rent quantified on the basis of the area of land leased whichever is higher so as to ensure a minimum royalty in relation to the land leased by the Government. Counsel also submitted that pattadar cannot be required to pay any amount other than the royalty or seignior age fee payable in respect of the minerals exploited or won from the land and levy and collection of any other amount other than normal assessment in relation to patta land would be ultra vires the Act. Counsel placed considerable reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Kumaresan v. State of Tamil Nadu (I.L.R 1994 (3) Madras 41.).

5. Senior Government Pleader Sri T.R. Ravi on the other hand conte