Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, VIVEK JAIN
Vista Sales Pvt. Ltd. Being Represented – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the petitioner's challenge regarding royalty. (Para 1 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioners argue legality of royalty demand and procedural fairness. (Para 2 , 3 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. continuity of royalty provisions in ongoing contracts. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. responses from the respondents about contractual legality. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 5. discussion on maintainability of writ petitions. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 6. court's reasoning leading to the final decision. (Para 18 , 38 , 42) |
| 7. legal interpretation of minerals royalty under various rules. (Para 20 , 22 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. court's observations on statutory interpretation. (Para 26 , 28 , 31 , 32 , 46) |
| 9. insurance of applicability of amended rules. (Para 30 , 34) |
| 10. court's ruling against additional royalty demand. (Para 39 , 47 , 48) |
ORDER :
Suresh Kumar Kait, CJ.
1. The facts and issues involved in the present petitions are same and similar, therefore, present petitions are being disposed of by this common order. The facts and annexures shall be discussed with reference to Writ Petition No.25052 of 2022, however, facts of other petitions shall not be repeated for the sake of brevity being similar.
2. The petitioners have filed these
Royalty is a contractual obligation distinct from taxes; amendments to regulations cannot retrospectively apply to existing contracts unless explicitly stated.
Subordinate legislation must align with the parent Act; regulations exceeding authority are invalid. Royalty payment under mining laws can only be for minerals actually removed or consumed.
The demands raised by the Deputy Director of Mines were found to be unsustainable in the eye of law, in view of the law laid down in National Mineral Development Corporation Limited v. State of M.P.,....
(1) Levy of tax on advertisement(s) – Imposition of royalty cannot be equated with imposition of tax/levy – Royalty and tax cannot be equated – Royalty and tax are not one and same.(2) Estoppel – Con....
Only the Central Government can amend royalty rates under Section 9(3) of the MMDR Act, and demands for additional royalty based solely on audit findings lack legal basis.
The stamp duty or the dead rent is to be charged on the basis of the amount of royalty to be paid, and the proviso to section 26 of the Act of 1899 applicable to the mining lease is required to be re....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
