STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. WESTERN COALFIELDSLIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-State being aggrieved by the judgment dated 18-7-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in group of Writ Petition Nos. 359/02 (Western Coalfields Limited and others Vs. State of M. P. and another), 717/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and others Vs. State of M. P. and another), 1742/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and others Vs. State of M. P. and another), 1743/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and others Vs. State of m. P. and another), 1744/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and others Vs. State of M. P. and another) and W. P. No. 1745/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and others Vs. State of M. P. and another) have filed these five Writ Appeal Nos. 1203/2006, (State of M. P. and another Vs. Western Coalfields Limited and another), 1204/2006 (State of M. P. and another Vs. Western Coalfields Limited and another), 1205/2006 (State of M. P. and another Vs. Western Coalfields limited and others), 1206/2006 (State of M. P. and another Vs. Western coalfields Limited and another) and 1207/2006 (State of M. P. and another Vs. Western Coalfields Limited and another) submitting inter alia that the orders passed by the learned Single Judge were absolutely unjustified and were running contrary to the provisions of Section 10 and Section 11 of the Coal Bearing Area (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 and the orders are also contrary to the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and the provisions of the Mines and minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for disposal of the present appeals are that the appellants/state issued certain directions to the respondents demanding the stamp duty on the ground that transfer of the land by the Central government in favour of the respondent Western Coalfields Limited amounts to execution of a lease and transfer, therefore, the order issued by the government would be an instrument and appropriate stamp duty will have to be paid. The said notices were challenged in the different writ petitions.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge after hearing the, parties came to the conclusion that a juxtapose reading of Section 10 and Section 11 of the Coal bearing Areas Act, 1957 would clearly provide that if there is statutory vesting then question of execution of the lease deed would not arise. The learned Single judge also opined that from Section 3 of the Indian Stamp Act, it would clearly appear that the Government would not be liable to pay the duty chargeable in respect of such instrument in view of the proviso appended to Section 3 of the indian Stamp Act.