The refund of seigniorage fee is permissible only in the case of premature termination of the quarry permit for the un-expired period of quarry.

Heard Mr. M.Muthappan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner calls in question the Government Order in G.O.(2D).No.22, Industries (MMC2) Department, dated 16.5.2012, seeking to quash the same and to direct the respondents to refund the balance amount of seigniorage fee and security deposit together with interest.

3. The facts in a nut-shell are as follows:

(a) The petitioner was granted permit to quarry 5000 lorry loads of "Savudu" in PWD lake, comprised in S.No.1091 of Pattarai Perumpudur B.Madura Manjakuppam Village, Tiruvallur Taluk and District for a period of 55 days (18.1.2011 to 13.3.2011) under Rule 12 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules (for short, 'the Rules'), as per the third respondent-District Collector's proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1076/2010/Mines-2, dated 18.1.2011.

(b) Pursuant to the said permission, the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.5,65,000/-(Rs.4,00,000/- + Rs.1,65,000/-) towards seigniorage fee, Rs.56,500/- (Rs.40,000/-+ Rs.16,500/-) towards security deposit, Rs.8,000/- towards income tax and Rs.500/-towards area assessment. The petitioner was granted bulk transport permit for 5000 lorry loads on 18.1.2011. But unfortunately, due to water spring in the lake, the petitioner was able to quarry only 5 lorry loads of Savudu and surrendered the balance despatch slips in respect of 4995 lorry loads.

(c) Thereafter, the petitioner requested the District Collector to permit him to quarry remaining lorry loads, pursuant to which, the District Collector called for a report from the Executive Engineer, PWD about the ground level of the area for which quarry permission was granted. The PWD Engineer sent his report, dated 31.3.2011 stating that the petitioner quarried only five lorry loads of Savudu and he recommended to grant permission to quarry the remaining 4995 lorry loads, on the basis of which, the District Collector granted permission in his proceedings, dated 1.6.2011 to quarry 4995 lorry loads of Savudu for a period of 50 days from 1.6.2011 to 20.7.2011.

(d) On receipt of the bulk transport permit, the petitioner was able to quarry only 130 lorry loads. Again, similar problem arose in the lake, viz., water spring and hence, the petitioner could not continue the quarrying operation. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the District Collector about his inability to continue the quarrying operation and also requested to refund the balance seigniorage fee.

(e) Pursuant to the petitioner's request, the District Collector called for a report from the PWD Engineer about the status of the lake and the quantity of the quarried mineral made by him. The PWD Engineer sent his report, dated 26.7.2011 stating that the petitioner quarried only 130 lorry loads as per the Mining Rules. On such report, the District Collector sent a report, dated 9.8.2011 to the Government recommending refund of the balance amount of seigniorage fee and other charges. Based on the same, the Government passed the impugned G.O., dated 16.5.2012, rejecting the request of the petitioner. by quoting the Rules.

4. Challenging the said G.O., dated 16.5.2012, the petitioner is before this Court on the ground that the same is contrary to law and passed in violation of principles of natural justice and the request of the petitioner was rejected by the first respondent by passing the impugned G.O., quoting wrong provisions of the Rules, which according to the petitioner is highly illegal and arbitrary.

5. The first and third respondents have filed counter affidavits on similar lines, inter-alia stating as follows:

(a) The petitioner was granted permission to quarry 5000 lorry loads of Savudu in S.No.1091 of Pattarai Perumpudur Madhura Manjankuppam Village, Tiruvallur Taluk and District for a period of 55 days from 18.1.2011 to 13.3.2011 under Rule 12 of the Rules, vide District Collector's Proceedings Rc.No.1