REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

NOVEL GRANITES LTD Appellant

V/S

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

MIDLAND R.C. V. HAUNCHWOOD BRICK AND TILE CO. [REFERRED TO]
NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY V. JOHN A. SEDRBARG [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT (NOW THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS V. HIRALAL [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD YASIN VS. TOWN AREA COMMITTES JALALABAD [REFERRED TO]
TAHIR HUSSAIN VS. DISTRICT BOARD MUZAFFARNAGAR [REFERRED TO]
GANAPATI SINGHJI VS. STATE OF AJMER [REFERRED TO]
BHOPAL SUGAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED M P VS. D P DUBE SALES TAX OFFICER BHOPAL REGION BHOPAL [REFERRED TO]
R ABDUL QUADER AND CO VS. SALES TAX OFFICER 2ND CIRCLE HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
BAIJNATH KADIO VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN DASS VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BANARSI DASS CHADHA VS. LT GOVERNOR DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. MAHALAKSHMI AMMAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. MCDOWELL AND CO [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. BIHAR DISTILLERY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
SIEL LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
KUNJ BEHARI LAL BUTAIL VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SAURASHTRA CEMENT AND CHEMICAL INDS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PUBLIC SERVICES TRIBNAL BAR ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
TEJ BAHADUR DUBE VS. FOREST RANGE OFFICER F S S W HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
V P PITHUPITCHAI VS. SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
S SAMUEL M D HARRISONS MALAYALAM VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
O K PLAY INDIA LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE II NEW DELHI [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK LANKA VS. RISHI DIXIT [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY DYEING AND MFG CO LTD VS. BOMBAY ENVIRONMENT ACTION GROUP [REFERRED TO]
KERALA SAMSTHANA CHETHU THOZHILALI UNION VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
KARNATAKA BANK LTD VS. STATE OF A P [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. P LAXMI DEVI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this batch of writ petitions, the petitioners called in question the legality and validity of the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Dealers rules, 2000 (for short, 'the Rules') notified by respondent No. 1 vide g. O. Ms. No. 537, Industries and Commerce (M. I) Department, dated 11. 10. 2000.

(2.) THE petitioners, most of whom are industrial units involved in the processing and pulverizing of mineral and some of them who are lessees to extract mineral such as Granite, dolamite, White Shale, Lime Stone, steatite have mainly felt aggrieved by the definition of 'mineral' contained in Rule 2 (l) (h)of the Rules as amended by G. O. Ms. No. 330 dated 14. 06. 2001. THE PETITIONERS' CASE:-

(3.) THE case of the petitioners in short is that the definition of 'mineral', which enlarged the scope of mineral as defined in section 3 (a) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act') is far beyond the delegated power of respondent No. 1. The petitioners averred that by enlarging the scope of the definition of Mineral, the respondents have brought the processed minerals and the finished products within their regulatory control, which resulted in violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19 (l) (g) of the Constitution of India. THE RESPONDENTS' STAND:-

Click here to view full judgment.

NOVEL GRANITES LTD Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address