Hon’ble Amitava Lala, J.—Basically this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner company, through its constituted attorney one Sri K.M. Abraham, praying inter alia quashing of all demands and collection of fee/toll on transportation of limestone from the quarries forming part of the mining lease area of the petitioner to its factory gate, and also for a direction upon the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to refund all collections of fee/toll collected by the Zila Panchayat, Sonebhadra, respondent No. 2 herein, through the contractor, respondent No. 3 herein, on the transportation of minerals, as aforesaid.

2. Briefly stated case of the petitioner is that it is a company, which, amongst other businesses, is also engaged in the manufacture of Portland cement. Pursuant to the proceedings of sale conducted in the Company Court, the assets of the Uttar Pradesh State Cement Corporation Limited, a Government company, were transferred in favour of the petitioner upon payment of a sum of Rs. 459 crores. Such sale was confirmed by the Company Judge by order dated 11/12th October, 2006. Thereafter, the petitioner undertook major renovation and refurbishment of the factory and the unit commenced commercial production of Portland cement on or about 2008. Upon confirmation of sale, the mining lease, which stood granted in favour of the company as well as all those independently promised and forming part of the sale, were transferred to the petitioner by the State under the provisions of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (hereinafter in short called as the ‘’Rules, 1960').

3. The present dispute pertains to the limestone lease. Mining lease area granted to the petitioner under the transfer deeds also included existing roads leading from the quarries to the factory gate of the units of the company. These roads run over numerous revenue plots which are duly recorded in the revenue records in the name of Public Works Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, petitioner company and individual land holders. However, on or about 5th April, 2011 the representatives of the respondent No. 3 have started demanding Rs. 100/- per truck carrying limestone from the quarry to the Dala Cement Factory as a pre-condition to the transit of the said vehicles. Thereafter, upon enquiry the petitioner came to know that Zila Panchayat-respondent No. 2 had framed certain bye-laws on 5th December, 1994 for levy of a fee on vehicles transporting minerals over roads in District Sonebhadra. Such bye-laws were published in the Gazette on 10th December, 1994. Subsequently, the rates of fee to be levied on transport of minerals were further revised by means of a notification dated 6th November, 2008, which were published in the Gazette on 20th December, 2008. On 31st March, 2011 the contract was awarded by the Zila Panchayat-respondent No. 2 in favour of the respondent No. 3 for collection of fee on transport of minerals.

4. Mr. Yashwant Varma, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, has contended that according to the respondent No. 2, in exercise of power under Section 239 of the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter in short called as the “Adhiniyam”) the rates of fee to be levied on transport of minerals were revised by the notification dated 6th November, 2008, published in the Gazette on 20th December, 2008. According to him, levy of fee under the bye-laws is wholly without jurisdiction or authority of law, inasmuch as no provision of Section 239 of the Adhiniyam empowers the Zila Panchayat to levy a fee on the transportation of minerals. More fundamentally, the limestone is not transported by the petitioner on or over any property vested in or entrusted to the management of Zila Panchayat nor does it traverse any public road or place, the use or occupation of which may have been allowed by the said Zila Panchayat. The road, over which the limestone is transported from the quarry to the factory gate of the petitio