2009 (8) TMI 1291 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved: Common issues of facts and law involved in two appeals arising from a common judgment regarding the validity and applicability of government notifications related to royalty rates for mining activities.

L.P.A. No. 793 of 2002:
The appellant held a lease for mining pebbles from a river basin under the Bihar Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1972. Dispute arose over the retrospective application of royalty rates as per government notifications dated 24.3.2001 and 26.12.2001. The appellant challenged the demand notices and subsequent orders, claiming that the higher royalty rate should apply only from 26.12.2001, not retrospectively from 1.4.2001.

The High Court analyzed the notifications and expert committee reports. The Court noted that the appellant did not contest the validity of the notifications but disputed the retrospective application of the higher royalty rate. Relying on legal precedents, the Court held that the higher rate could not be enforced prior to 26.12.2001. The Court emphasized the importance of notification dates in determining the applicability of royalty rates, ensuring fairness to the lessees.

The Court referred to a Supreme Court judgment to support its decision, highlighting the potential injustice if the higher rate was applied for the period before the final notification date. The Court concluded that the appellant should pay the increased royalty rate from 26.12.2001 onwards, not retrospectively from 24.3.2001. Consequently, the Court allowed L.P.A. No. 793 of 2002, setting aside the previous orders and modifying the judgment in favor of the appellant.

L.P.A. No. 893 of 2002:
Similar to the previous appeal, this case involved a lessee challenging the retrospective application of royalty rates as per government notifications. The Court found the issues and arguments to be identical to the previous appeal. Consequently, the order of the appellate authority was set aside, and the judgment of the Single Judge was modified in favor of the appellant.

In conclusion, both L.P.A. No. 793 of 2002 and L.P.A. No. 893 of 2002 were allowed by the High Court. The appellants were directed to pay the revised royalty rates from 26.12.2001 onwards, with adjustments for amounts already deposited. No costs were awarded in the circumstances of the case.