MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these writ applications a common question arise as such they have been heard together.

(2.) The petitioner is a company engaged in large scale civil construction work. As a part of its business, it had undertaken certain work from National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) for repairing and strengthening the road of National Highway. In both these cases, the agreement as entered into between the parties, that is the petitioner and the National Highway Authority of India, were admittedly entered into prior to 19.4.2006, which date is a material date and of some significance as would be seen later.

(3.) In course of executing their work agreement petitioner was required to strengthen the embankments of the National Highway. For this purpose, they were required to use substantial quantity of earth. The petitioner entered into agreement with nearby raiyats, who permitted petitioner to remove earth from their raiyati lands. Some wanted irrigation ditch to be created, some wanted ponds to be created and some wanted some embankments to be created, but the common underlying fact was that petitioner was permitted by the raiyats to remove earth on payment for facilitating the contract, which petitioner had taken from the National Highway Authority of India Limited. The Officers of the Mining Department of the State, on finding that the petitioner was removing earth from various fields nearby and using it, demanded royalty on the ground that petitioner was extracting minor mineral and was as such liable to pay royalty. Initially, petitioner paid but thereafter made a representation for refund pleading that it had paid under mistaken notion of law, whereas in fact, there was no liability. That having not been done and being pressed for further payment these two writ applications were filed in which initially interim stay was granted but later on vacated. The writ applications have now been listed for final disposal after hearing.