TRINAYAN ASSOCIATES Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No.862/2017, WP(C) No.930/2017, WP(C) No.931/2017, WP(C) No.933/2017 and WP(C) No.934/2017 as well as Mr. K.D. Chetry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) No.1234/2017. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Senior Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State of Assam.

(2.) All the writ petitions involve a common question of facts and law as to whether the PWD while releasing the payment of bills of the contractors who works under the department are entitled to deduct the component of forest royalty, that may be payable to the Forest Department. The expression forest royalty is understood to mean the royalty that is required to be paid in respect of any mineral removed or consumed from a mining leased area. Such minor minerals also include stone and sand that are required for the construction works undertaken by the respondent PWD.

(3.) Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 provides that the holder of a mining lease granted before the commencement of the Act shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the instrument of lease or in any law in force at commencement, pay royalty in respect of any mineral removed or consumed by him or by his agent, manager, employee, contractor or sub-leesee from the leased area after such commencement, at the rate for the time being specified in the second schedule in respect of that mineral. The implication of provision of Section 9 of the Mines and Minerals Act 1957 is that in respect of any minor mineral that may be extracted and removed from the mining leased area the amount specified as royalty, is to be paid to the concerned authorities.