TARLOK CHAND AGGARWAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal by plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree dated 01.02.1985 passed by learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Phillaur, whereby suit for declaration filed by plaintiffs was dismissed as well as against the judgment and decree dated 29.07.1986 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, whereby appeal preferred by the plaintiffs has also been dismissed.

(2.) THE detailed facts of the case are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, the facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are to the effect that plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration to the effect that notice for recovery of Rs.13,262.95 as land revenue with regard to royalty on making of the bricks and also of taking earth work from the land now in possession of the plaintiffs as lessee is illegal, null and void and the defendants have no right to recovery any royalty on brick earth as minor minerals under the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act 1957 with a consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from assessing, levying and recovering any amount as royalty from the plaintiffs for earth of land owned by private owner, now taken on lease by plaintiff for making bricks. Plaintiffs are running business of brick kiln. It involves the digging of earth from the surface of the land of the real owners and now in possession of the plaintiffs as lessee. The brick earth is not covered in the definition of minerals under the provisions of Mines and Minerals Act, 1957. Defendants No.1 and 2 have no right to assess royalty for excavation of brick earth from the land of private land owners. As such notice served by defendant No.3 is illegal.

(3.) UPON notice defendants appeared and filed written statement and averred that plaintiffs have no quarry rights. These vest in the Government as the brick earth is minor mineral. The plaintiff has been collecting royalty on behalf of the Government from the purchasers of bricks and are, thus, liable to pay to the Government. According to the Record of Rights it is the Government which is owner of quarry rights. On the pleadings of the parties, the Court of first instance framed the following issues: -