The court held that the State was liable to account to the plaintiff for the amount of royalty collected from the M.C.C. Co. on building stones and sand excavated from the plaintiff's contract area, as the State had intermeddled with the plaintiff's contractual rights and had collected the royalty itself.

JUDGMENT:- Though the appeals arise out of separate suits, in which separate judgments have been passed, but they relate to the same Royalty Collection Contract, and some of issues are common. Therefore, it will be convenient to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment.

2. I will first narrate the facts of the case.

3. A notice was published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated May 25, 1961, under Rule 36 (1) of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) for grant of several royalty collection contracts ending on March 31, 1963 for a period of two years. We are presently concerned with item No. 30 of the said notification regarding royalty collection contract for ordinary sand and building stones excavated from the quarries in 12 villages of Tehsil, Bhanerorgarh, mentioned therein. The auction took place on June 22, 1961, and the bid of Pusharam (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) of Rupees 3,351/-, being the highest, the State of Rajasthan granted to the plaintiff a right to collect royalty chargeable on ordinary sand and building stones at the rate of 25 N.P. per tonne, as specified in the Rules. An order dated July 3, 1961 granting the contract was communicated to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff executed an agreement on July 10, 1961, which was duly registered. The Modern Construction Company (P) Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the M.C.C. Co.) had taken a contract for construction of main dam and allied buildings in Rana Pratap Sagar Dam, Chambal Project. This project was being executed under the Control and Supervision of the Chief Engineer, Rana Pratap Sagar Dam, Chambal Project, Kota. For the construction of the dam, the M.C.C. Co., quarried and removed building stones and ordinary sand since November 1961 from the 12 villages, mentioned in the agreement of royalty collection contract, given to the plaintiff but in spite of repeated demands by the plaintiff did not pay any royalty to him. The Superintending Engineer (Irrigation deducted the amount of royalty on the building stones and sand excavated and removed by the M.C.C. Co., from the area of 12 villages under the contract of the plaintiff, from the monthly running bills of the M.C.C. Co. Though, the period of contract was up to March 31, 1963, but purporting to act in pursuance of clause (16) of the agreement, the Government issued one month's notice dated April 27, 1962 to terminate the plaintiff's contract. In the notice, the Government merely declared that the construction of Rana Pratap Sagar Dam is in the 'public interest'. The said notice was served on the plaintiff on May 6, 1962, and its one month's term expired on June 6, 1962. The case of the plaintiff is that the Government of Rajasthan terminated the royalty collection contract prematurely, arbitrarily and illegally, and that clause (16) of the agreement was not warranted by law. The ex parte order of the termination was opposed to the principles of natural justice, inasmuch as, no opportunity to hear the plaintiff before the contract was terminated was granted.

4. The plaintiff filed suit No. 8/62 against the M.C.C. Co., in the court of District Judge, Kota on May 31, 1962 for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 25,000/- being the amount of royalty, which was payable to the plaintiff by the M.C.C. Co., during the subsistence of the contract i.e., up to 5-6-1962, along with interest. The M.C.C. Co., raised various pleas, and also pleaded that there was no privity of contract between it and the plaintiff; that the contract for collection of royalty, on which the plaintiff has based his claim, is contrary to public policy and 'public interest', and as such is void, that the plaintiff is not entitled to charge any royalty from it, because clause 5 of the standard form of agreement, as prescribed under the rules clearly lays down that in case where royalty collection contracts are given on villagewise basis, the royalty collection contractor shall not ch