REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

SHANTHI SAROOP SHARMA Appellant

V/S

STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

LOWER MAINLAND DAIRY PRODUCTS SALES ADJUSTMENT COMMITTEE V. CRYSTAL DAIRY LTD. [REFERRED TO]
KHUSHAL SINGH,V. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
RAMULU PANTULU V. PROVINCE OF MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
SETHI MARBLE STONE INDUSTRIES V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
JAGANNATH RAMANUJ DAS VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS ENDOW MENTS MADRAS VS. LAKSHMINDRA THIRTHA SWAMIAR OF SHIRUR MUTT [REFERRED TO]
EDWARD MILLS CO LIMITED BEAWAR VS. STATE OF AJMER [REFERRED TO]
VASANLAL MAGANBHAI SANJANWALA THE PRATAP SPINNING WEAVING MANUFACTURING CO LIMITED VS. STATE OF BOMBAY NOW MAHARASHTRA :STATE OF BOMBAY NOW MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
HINGIR RAMPUR COAL CO LIMITED VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
R M D C MYSORE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
CORPORATION OF CALCUTTA VS. LIBERTY CINEMA [REFERRED TO]
DEVI DAS GOPAL KRISHNAN VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
ANAND KUMAR BINDAL VS. EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
KUNWAR MURLI MANOHAR VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SURAJDIN LAXMANLAL VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]
DAMODARAN VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
BHERULAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
GANGA RAM SURAJ PARKASH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
K K WADHWANI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. REHMAN [REFERRED TO]
LADDU MAL VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
SREE RAJAH VENKATA RAMAYYA APPA RAO BAHADUR, ZAMINDAR GARU OF NUZVID VS. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA IN COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY THE COLLECTOR OF KISTNA [REFERRED TO]
H.R. RAMA RAO (DIED) HIS L.RS HR VENKAMMA VS. THE COLLECTOR [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of 14 petitioners under this Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution (Civil Writ Nos. 2198 of 1966 and 159, 206, 416, 438, 439, 443, 484, 517, 518, 636, 2547 and 2720 of 1967), in which common questions of law have been raised. Dr. Shanthi Sarup Sharma and other petitioners have been engaging in and carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of bricks in various parts of the State of Punjab, as it stood before its reorganization in the year 1966. All of them hold valid licences to carry on this trade in accordance with the provisions of the Punjab Control Bricks Supplies Order, 1956, and they are running brick-kilns for manufacture of bricks in the lands, of which some of the petitioners are owners, and the other lessees.

(2.) IN the year 1957 the Parliament enacted the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act LXVII of 1957 (hereinafter called the Act ) for regulation of mines and development of minerals under the control of the union. ;in section 3 of the Act "minerals" are defined to include all minerals except mineral oils. Provisions regarding the prospecting licences and mining leases are contained in sections 4 to 12. Section 13 empowers the Central Government to make rules the regulating grant of prospect of minerals and for purposes connected therewith. By section 14 prospecting licences and mining leases in respect of minor minerals have been excluded from the operation of Sections 4 to 13 and the authority to make rules in respect of minor minerals has been given to the State Governments under Sections 18 of the Act, which is in these words:-

(3.) THE expression "minor minerals" is defined in Section 3 of the Act in these words:-

Click here to view full judgment.

SHANTHI SAROOP SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address