SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(Raj) 91

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : K.S.Sidhu
ATMA RAM BILOCHI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Respondent
Civil Writ Petn 989 Of 1980
Decided On : 08/08/1980

Advocates Appeared:
G.G.Sharma, M.I.KHAN

The government has the authority to levy and collect dead rent under Section 15(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 and the rules made thereunder. However, the increase in dead rent cannot exceed the maximum limit prescribed in the rules.

Headnote:

MINES AND MINERALS (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1957 - SECTIONS 2, 14, 15 - RAJASTHAN MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1977 - RULES 3, 18, 19, SCHEDULE I, SCHEDULE II - DEAD RENT - LEGALITY OF LEVY AND COLLECTION - RATE OF DEAD RENT - INCREASE BEYOND MAXIMUM LIMIT PRESCRIBED IN RULES - VALIDITY.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, holders of mining leases under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, challenged the increase in yearly dead rent imposed by the Rajasthan Government while renewing their leases. The main issues were whether the government had the authority to levy and collect dead rent and whether the increase exceeded the maximum limit prescribed by law.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the government had the authority to levy and collect dead rent under Section 15(1) of the Act and the rules made thereunder. However, the increase in dead rent could not exceed the maximum limit prescribed in Schedule II of the Rules.

Issues: 1. Whether the Government of Rajasthan is authorised by law to levy and collect dead rent? 2. If so, whether the increase in the yearly dead rent, made by the government while sanctioning renewal of the leases in question exceeds the maximum limit prescribed by law, and is therefore, invalid?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 15(1) of the Act empowers the State Government to make rules for regulating the grant of mining leases in respect of minor minerals and for purposes connected therewith. This includes the power to prescribe the rate of royalty and dead rent. 2. Rule 18(3) of the Rules provides that the yearly dead rent shall be fixed by the government within the limits prescribed in Schedule II. The maximum rate of dead rent for the relevant minerals was Rs. 6.25 per 10 square meters. 3. The increase in dead rent ordered by the government exceeded the maximum limit prescribed in Schedule II and was therefore illegal and invalid.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were partly allowed. The court directed the government to fix the dead rent within the maximum and minimum limits prescribed in Schedule II of the Rules.

Judgment


K. S. SIDHU, J.

( 1 ) THIS judgment will deal with S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 955 of 1980 and the companion petitions listed above. The respective IN petitioners are all holders of different mining leases under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and development) Act, 1957, which will hereinafter be called the Act and the Rules made thereunder. Two common questions of law arise in these petitions and the same may be stated as under:-

i. Whether the Government of Rajasthan is authorised by law to levy and collect dead rent?

ii. If so, whether the increase in the yearly dead rent, made by the government while sanctioning renewal of the leases in question exceeds the maximum limit prescribed by law, and is therefore, invalid?

( 2 ) IT is not necessary to recapitulate here the pleadings of the parties in all the petitions. Such recapitulation may be made only in respect of the pleadings in s. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 955 of 1980 as typical of all the petitions. Atma Ram bilochi is the petitioner in that case. By an instrument of lease, executed on april 7, 1975, he was granted a mining lease for excavating marble from an area measuring 7200 square meters for a term of five years. The rate of dead rent fixed under the then extant rules was Rs. 2. 75 per 10 square metres. Thus, the total dead rent, payable by the petitioner in respect of the entire area of 7200 square metres, calculated at the rate of Rs. 2. 75 per 10 square meters, worked out to Rs. 1980/- only.

( 3 ) THE petitioner applied for renewal of the said lease in accordance with the provisions of Rule 17, Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules. 1977 (hereinafter called the Rules ). The Rajasthan Government sanctioned renewal of the lease for a period of five years on the condition, inter alia, that the petitioner shall pay yearly dead rent of Rs. 15960/-instead of Rs. 1980/ -. In terms of Rule 19 of the Rules, the Government notified the petitioner, vide the letter of sanction itself, that if he did not execute the formal lease within three months of the date of receipt of the sanction, the lease shall be deemed to have been revoked.

( 4 ) ON enquiry by the petitioner as to the rationale of this abnormal increase in the yearly dead rent from Rs. 1980/- to Rs. 15,960/-, he discovered that the same had been done on the authority of a letter, dated, November 5, 1979, from the Deputy Secretary, Government of Rajasthan in the Mines (Group IV)Department to the Superintending Engineer, Mines and Geology Department, udaipur. The impugned letter which is reproduced in the petition reads:

"the formula of renewal of dead rent will have to be what has recently been decided in the case of Associated Stone Industries, kota. This in other words, means on renewals, the dead rents will be calculated at plus 40% of the existing dead rent and the maximum excess royalty paid in any of the preceding years. The original dead rent shall be reckoned @ Rs. 5,50 per 10 sq. meters".

4a. The petitioner filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of india challenging the increase of yearly dead rent in the manner as stated above. The grounds on which the increase is challenged and which were the only ones pressed at the time of arguments have already been stated in the form of two legal issues in the opening paragraph of this judgment.

( 5 ) IN its return, filed in answer to this petition, the State of Rajasthan pleaded that under the Rules, framed by it in exercise of the powers conferred by section 15 of the Act, it has the legal authority to levy and collect dead rent, and that the dead rent can be legally levied and collected at a rate higher than the rate prescribed in Second Schedule of the Rules.

( 6 ) AS already stated, the first question which falls for determinations whether the Government of Rajasthan is authorised by law to levy and collect dead rent, before going into the relevant provisions of law bearing on this question, it will be helpful to underst




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top