ROHIT NEWAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the four writ petitions pose common questions of law on same set of facts and thus taken up for a common judgement and order. The core issue involved in all the three writ petitions is whether "River Silt" can be said to be "Minor Mineral" or can be said to be "ordinary clay" as defined in Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rule, 1994 for the purpose of levying royalty by the State Government.

(2.) According to the averments made in the writ petitions, the petitioners are carrying on the business of transportation of "Brahmaputra River Silt" to various destinations located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Guwahati city for the purpose of earning their livelihood. According to them, they collect/extract "River Silt" from Panikhaiti, Chunsali, Dompara etc. in an around greater Gauhati and transport the same to various destinations by their own trucks which are used for the purpose of earth feeling. Their grievance is that the Government of Assam in the forest department is insisting for payment of royalty under the provision of the Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994. According to them, the "River Silt" being not included in the definition of "Minor Minerals", the State Government is wrong in insisting for payment ofroyalty.

(3.) The state government has contested the claim of the petitioners by filing an affidavit. As per the stand in the affidavit the Government during the period of 5 months from November 2002 to May 2003 has received revenue to the tune of Rs. 6,20,000 in respect of extraction and transportation of "Brahmaputra River Silt" in Guwahati. The stand of the respondents has been summarized in paragraph 4 of the affidavit which reads as follows: