9911796707
TMI Blog1956 (3) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ond Rajasthan, Mangalram is a contractor appointed by the State of Rajasthan for collecting wnat is called royalty in connection with these quarries. Mangalram. holds a contract from the State of Rajasthan for this purpose as he offered the highest bid of ₹ 39,251/- for collection of royalty. According to the contract entered into between Mangalram and the State of Rajasthan, he is authorised to collect royalty on stones from the quarry-holders or from persons taking the stone from such quarry-holders at the rate specified in the schedule attached to the contract. The contract is valid for 3 years from 1-4-1954, to 31-3-1957. One of the terms prescribes that stone would be supplied free of royalty to bona fide cultivators who are a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , and is hit by Article 14 of the Constitution as. there is no reasonable basis for the classification. 5. The application has been opposed on behalf of the State as well as by Mangalram. Two preliminary objections have been taken, namely (1) that the application has been made with great delay and should be thrown out on that ground, and (2) that the applicant cannot challenge the rates for the royalty is to be paid by the quarry-men, and not by the purchasers, and the applicants have, therefore-no interest in the matter. Resides these preliminary objections, it is urged that different rates can be fixed by Government depending upon where the atones are going to be used, and that this does not amount to discrimination. It is urged tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tself lays down that the contractor is authorised to collect the royalty from the quarry-holders or from persons taking stones from such quarry-holders. Further, it appears that even though the quarry-men may be legally liable, the purchasers do pay the royalty at the rates specified in the contract on behalf of quarry-men. Affidavits of three quarry-men have been filed, which show that what the quarry-men do is to ask the purchaser to pay the royalty, though they would have us believe that they do so only when they have not got money with them to pay the royalty. There is also an affidavit of a dealer who says that the royalty is paid by the quarry-men, and sometimes when they have not got the money, they ask the purchaser to pay it. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 11-6-1955, Part IV (C) at page 254. These rules also prescribe a rate of royalty in Schedule I. There is, however, no difference in the Schedule to these rules in the rate of royalty based on where the stone is going to be taken or consumed. It is clear, therefore, that royalty is a charge by the owner of minerals from those to whom he gives the concession to remove them, and the charge is on production, the rate being fixed according to weight. The fixation of different rates of royalty depending upon where the mineral extracted is going to be consumed is against the very principle of royalty, and learned counsel for the opposite parties have not been able to show us any royalty rule anywhere where different rates of royalty have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, unless it can be supported on the basis of a reasonable classification. Is there then any reasonable basis for making this difference in the rate of royalty? In this connection, we may refer to a term of the contract according to which bona fide cultivators have been exempted from royalty. Now that discrimination may be justified as a reasonable classification for the State may very well feel that the class of cultivators, who are generally poor, should be given a concession as compared to other classes. This, however, should not be taken as our final opinion, for the point does not directly, arise in this case. But we can see no reasonable basis for making a discrimination between a man. living in Nimbahera Tahsil, and another man li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll Part B states since 1-4-1955, what the State is doing by doubling the royalty, where goods are to be sent outside Rajasthan, is really charging an extra export duty which, it is obvious, it cannot do under the camouflage of royalty. The State cannot be allowed to do indirectly through a camouflage what it cannot do directly. We are, therefore, of opinion that so far as exports of stone outside Rajasthan are concerned, an extra amount charged as royalty is nothing more or less than export duty, and the State cannot now charge it after 1-4-1955. 12. Then we come to the contention of the applicant that this is not royalty at all, and that the State cannot charge anything. This contention is, in our opinion, incorrect. The charge is un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
