The main legal point established is that the authorities cannot insist on transport permits or indicating the final place of destination in the bills issued by the Public Works Department for transporting processed/filtered sand from the petitioners' stockyards, as the rules and provisions do not prohibit the petitioners from purchasing sand in bulk quantity, storing it in their stockyard, and selling it to customers after processing and filtering.

COMMON ORDER

The above writ petitions are filed seeking a direction as against the respondents whereby, the respondents should be prohibited from insisting the petitioner and petitioner's customers, either to obtain transport permit or to indicate the final place of destination in the bills issued by the Public Works Department, to transport the processed/filtered sand from the stockyards of the petitioner.

2. The issue involved in these writ petitions are relating to the method of transport of sand, consequent to the amendment introduced under Rule 38 A of the Tamil Nadu Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1959 (hereinafter called as 'Rules'). The Government by G.O.Ms.No.95 Industries (MMC.I) Department dated 1/10/2003 has introduced the above said amendment in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Sections (1) and (1-A) of Section 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (Central Act 67 of 1957) (herein after called as Act).

3. By virtue of the said amendment, all existing lessees for quarrying sand in Government lands and permissions/leases granted in ryotwari lands shall cease to be effective on and from the date of coming into force of the said rule and the right to exploit sand in the State shall vest with the State Government to the exclusion of others.

4. Originally, the sand quarry lessees were granted under Rule 8 of the Rules and the private parties were permitted to obtain lease, who shall transport the sand after quarry, on payment of necessary seigniorage fees and by obtaining transport permits along with despatch slips. The despatch slips to transport sand from the quarry site is contemplated as per Rule 36 (5) (b) of The Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. The despatch slips contain the place of destination namely, the consumers place or the stockyard. After the introduction of the above said amendment, direct loading by the intending buyers was permitted from the quarry site. Subsequently, the loading of sand of the loading contractors have been introduced and contractors have been awarded by the tender system.

5. The writ petitioners, who are loading contractors, have filed the above writ petitions under the following circumstances:-

According to the petitioners, they are purchasing the sand by buying D.D. for a sum of Rs.626/- (Rupees six hundred and twenty six only), for the value of the lorry load of two units of sand, which includes sales tax of 4% to first sales and loading charges. The lorries will have to stand in queue and after making necessary payment, the Officers of Public Works Department will issue the sale bill and the sale bill discloses the starting point and the destination, as per the choice of the purchaser, which is mostly stockyard.

6. It is contended that since Public Works Department operates quarries between 8.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m., one has to wait for several hours to load the sand at the quarry site and in view of the traffic restrictions in the movement of lorries, in the city of Madras and other places, wherein the vehicles would not be allowed during the day time, after purchase of the sand, they would accumulate it at the stockyard and it would be more convenient to transport thereafter to the customers during the night hours from the said stockyard.

7. It is further contended that the sand, which was purchased, cannot be used as it is, since it has to be processed and filtered to cater to the needs of the customers. It is further contended that once the sand is purchased from the Public Works Department, the ownership of the sand, passes on to the purchasers and they can deal with the same in what ever manner they like, subject to the payment of sales tax towards second sales, which is being complied with.

8. It is further contended that in the absence of specific regulations, directing the petitioners to indicate the place of destination of the consumers, such insistence is not permissible in law. Further, the respondents have not