(1.) - Leave granted.
(2.) All the appeals raise common question of law and the High Court also disposed of the matters by a common judgment. These appeals arise from judgment of the Karnataka High Court in Writ Appeals. The respondents contractors entered into contracts with the Government to execute work as per the schedule of the contract provided in the form. They have to excavate the minor minerals either from the Government quarry or from private quarry and use them for the execution of the work. It is one of the requirements in the contract under Clause 35 of the Schedule that they are liable to pay royalty on the material so removed from Government quarry for the execution of the work. The Government have demanded payment of the royalty. Calling in question of the entitlement of the Government under Rule 19 of the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concessions Rules 1969 for short 'the Rules' the respondent filed a bunch of writ petitions and disclaimed their liability to pay the same. The High Court by a learned single Judge and the Division Bench on appeal accepted their contentions and issued a mandamus not to collect the royalty from the respondents. The question whether they are liable to pay royalty on the value of minerals removed from the Government land under' any other law was left open. Thus, the State filed these appeals by special leave under Art. 136.
(3.) Admittedly, the appellants had granted right to the contractors to extract minor minerals from the quarries owned by the State. Clause 2 of the Schedule 'D' to the contract provides the liability to pay royalty of mining: -