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

1993 Supreme(Ori) 99

B.L.HANSARIA, R.K.PATRA
RAMESH CHANDRA SAHOO – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.DEO, B.S.TRIPATHY, D.MISHRA, D.N.MISHRA, P.PANDEY, R.N.NAIK, S.K.DAS GUPTA

PATRA, J.

( 1 ) A short question that arises for determination in this case is whether royalty is imposable after coming into force of the Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1990 by invoking Rule 33 thereof in respect of an existing lease granted under the Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1983.

( 2 ) THE Tahsildar, Dhankanal opposite party No. 2 granted two long term leases (Padmanava Stone Quarries Nos. 1 and 2) to the petitioner vide long term lease cases Nos 6 and 7 of 1990-91 under the Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1983 Rules' ). Pursuant to such grant the petitioner started operating the quarries in question although no formal lease deeds have been executed. When the matter stood thus, the 1983 Rules came to be repealed and replaced by Orissa Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1990 Rules) by specifying rates of royalty payable in respect of minor minerals in Schedule 1, following the enforcement of the 1990 Rules with effect from 19-8-1990, the petitioner was served with two notices dated 11-1-1991 as per Annexures 7 and 8 calling upon him to deposit the differential royalty which














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top