IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. MANIKUMAR, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, JJ.
Namakkal District Stone Crusher, Rep., by its Secretary, P. Mani - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Industries Department, Chennai & Others - Respondents
W.P. Nos. 1256, 2742, 2846, 2847, 2986 to 2988, 3445 to 3448, 4062 to 4065, 4602, 4603, 5421, 5458, 5459, 6803 to 6806, 9048 to 9051, 13475 13567, 13568, 13928, 13949, 14209, 14210, 26806 & 26823 of 2018 & connected Miscellaneous Petitions
Decided On : 16-09-2019
Tamil Nadu District Mineral Foundation Rules, 2017 - Rules 8, 9, 10 & 11 - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act, 1957 - Section 9B - Tamil Nadu District Mineral Foundation Rules, 2017 - Rules 8 to 11 - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act, 1957 is to provide for the development and regulation of Mines and Minerals under the control of Union of India, enacted by the Parliament and the same came into force - Main object of the Act is to conserve minerals. As per Section 2 of the Mines and Mineral Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), the entire mining field is under Union Control. Section 13 of the Act, empowers the Central Government to frame Rules, in respect of Major Minerals. Under Section 15 of the Act, power has been delegated to the States to frame Rules, in respect of Minor Minerals. As per Section 14 of the Act, Sections 5 to 13 do not apply to Minor Minerals – Held, Honble Supreme Court, therefore held that under the provisions of Mines and Mineral Act, 1957, no State Government have power to frame a rule with retrospective effect or to create a deeming fiction, either specifically or by necessary intendment. To arrive at this conclusion, the Honble Supreme Court applied the principle that a State Government cannot make a subordinate legislation having retrospective effect unless the parent statute, expressly or by necessary implication, authorises it to do so - learned Advocate General appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu has fairly accepted that in view of the proposition in law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in Federation of Indian Mineral Industries - All the writ petitions are disposed
JUDGMENT :
S. Manikumar, J.
1. Common prayer in all the writ petitions is for a Declaration, declaring Rules 8, 9, 10 & 11 of the Tamil Nadu District Mineral Foundation Rules, 2017, introduced by the 1st respondent by G.O.Ms.No.57, Industries (MMD-1) Dept., dated 19.05.2017, published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette Extraordinary bearing No.143, dated 19.05.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.90, Industries (MMD-1) Dept., dated 27.07.2017, published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette Extraordinary bearing No.248, dated 27.07.2017, as illegal, ultra vires, null and void.
2. As pleadings and submissions are common, all the writ petitions are disposed of, by this common order.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act, 1957 (Central Act 67 of 1957) is to provide for the development and regulation of Mines and Minerals under the control of Union of India, enacted by the Parliament and the same came into force on 01.06.1958. The main object of the Act is to conserve minerals. As per Section 2 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), the entire mining field is under Union Control. Section 13 of the Act, empowers the Central Government to frame Rules, in respect of Major Minerals. Under Section 15 of the Act, power has been delegated to the States to frame Rules, in respect of Minor Minerals. As per Section 14 of the Act, Sections 5 to 13 do not apply to Minor Minerals.
4. By Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 (Act.10 of 2015), the Central Government inserted Section 9B, Sub-Clauses (qqa) to (qqk) to Clause (2) of Section 13, Section 15(4) and Section 15-A to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Section 9B mandates establishment of District Mineral Foundation by the States. As stated earlier, in view of Section 14 of the Act, both Sections 9B and 13, will not apply to Minor Minerals.
5. Government of India, Ministry of Mines, by notification / order bearing No.16/7/2015 M.VI(Part), dated 16.09.2015, mandated the State Governments to establish “District Mineral Foundation” in every district in the country, in terms of Sub-Section (1) of Section 9B of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and such foundation shall deemed to have come into force w.e.f. 12-01-2015. At this juncture, it is most important to note that the order of the Central Government to establish District Mineral Foundations is under Section 9B of the Act which does not apply to minor minerals.
6. Under Sub-Sections 5 and 6 of Section 9B of the Act, the Central Government issued notification bearing No.G.S.R.715(E), dated 17.09.2015, making “Mines and Minerals (Contribution to District Mineral Foundation) Rules, 2015. By the said rules, rates of contribution have been fixed as 10% of the royalty in terms of the second schedule for the leases or prospecting cum mining leases granted after 12.01.2015 and 30% in respect of the leases or prospecting licenses cum leases granted prior to 12.02.2015. The above said notification is extracted hereunder:
MINISTRY OF MINES
NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2015
G.S.R. 715(E). —In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (5) and (6) of Section 9B of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (67 of 1957), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules specifying the amount to be paid by holder of a mining lease or a prospecting licence-cum-mining lease, in addition to the royalty, to the District Mineral Foundation of the district established by the concerned State Government by notification, in which the mining operations are carried on, namely:—
1. Short title and commencement.—(1) These rules may be called as the Mines and Minerals (Contribution to District Mineral Foundation) Rules, 2015.
(2) These rules shall be deemed to have come into force on the 12th day of January, 2015.
Amount of contribution to be made to Dist
Mahinder Kumar Gupta vs. Union of India
Hukam Chand vs. Union of India
Mahabir Vegetable Oils (P) Ltd. vs. State of Haryana
Federation of Indian Mineral Industries and others vs. Union of India and Another
A. Thangal Kunju Musaliar v. M. Venkitachalam Potti
Panchi Devi v. State of Rajasthan
Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. Sharadkumar Jayantikumar Pasawalla
State of Rajasthan v. Basant Agrotech (India) Limited
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – I v. Vatika Township Private Limited
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.