The central legal point established in the judgment is that the stipulation for production of proof with regard to payment of royalty for minor minerals by the contractors is unsustainable and not enforceable in the manner as it was being done.

ORDER :- As common questions are involved, the order in this petition shall govern the disposal of writ petitions No. 8541/03, 8571/03, 8622/03, 8652/03, 8734/03, 8740/03, 8962/03, 9041/03, 39/04, 461/04, 645/2004 and 1196/2004.

2. Petitioners in all these petitions are establishments carrying out activities of construction work for various departments of the State Government or the authorities, who are arrayed as respondents in this petition. Petitioners have been granted contract in accordance with the tenders submitted by them.

3. According to the petitioners, for the purpose of executing the work of construction awarded to them petitioners are required to use certain minor minerals like sand, bolders, gitti etc. which they have purchased them from the suppliers of these materials and the suppliers in turn have purchased from various mine owners and quarry owners. Grievance of the petitioners are that while settling the bills of the petitioners respondents are insisting upon production of No Objection Certificate from the mining department to show that royalty on the material has been paid as a condition precedent for finalisation of the bills. Inviting my attention to Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, it was argued that the incidence for payment of royalty arises the moment mineral is extracted. Royalty is to be paid by the mining lease holder and the mineral extracted cannot be removed from the mine area or the quarry area, as the case may be, without payment of royalty. Instead of taking action for recovery of royalty at the place where the mineral is extracted, insisting upon production of No Objection Certificate from the petitioners, it is said to be illegal. In support of their contention, petitioners rely on a judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of M.P. Contractors' Sangh Indore v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1987 Jab LJ 743) : (AIR 1987 Madh Pra 74).

4. Refuting the aforesaid respondents have contended that as they have reasons to believe that royalty in accordance with the statutory provision has not been paid, they have stipulated a condition in all the agreements wherein petitioners are required to show that all taxes, royalties and other dues have been cleared, Inviting my attention to clause 6.2 of the tender document filed in writ petition No. 8449/2003 it was submitted by Shri J. D. Suryavanshi that in view of the aforesaid, the petitioners have to establish that royalty has been paid and, therefore, this being a condition in the agreement, for use of materials like Gitti, Murram and B.T. and other materials petitioners have to establish that royalty has been paid. According to the respondents, there is no illegality in claiming such No Objection Certificate and the petitions are liable to be dismissed.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench in the case of M.P. Contractors' Sangh (AIR 1987 Madh Pra 74) (supra), it is seen that in the said case registered society of building and contractors association had challenged certain circulars issued by the State Government to all Collectors indicating therein that before bills of the contractors are paid with regard to supply of minor minerals, the department should ensure that royalty for the same has been paid. Accordingly, Collectors started insisting upon proof of payment of royalty. This action was challenged in these petitions and the circulars issued by the State Government and consequential instructions issued by the Collectors were challenged mainly on the ground that royalty is paid the moment mineral is extracted and the petitioners, who purchase the processed mineral material from various suppliers, cannot produce any receipt or certificate as they themselves do not know from which quarry or mine the supplier has purchased the material.

6. Considering the rival submissions that were advanced before it the Divis