TUNTUN PRASAD CHAURASIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this bunch of writ petitions the petitioners, who are brick manufacturers, have questioned the constitutional validity of rule 26-A of the Bihar Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1972, substituted by S.O. No. 59, dated 26-3-1987, whereby and whereunder the State Government had in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 15(1) and (3) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (hereinafter called "the Act") made a provision to determine consolidated amount of royalty to be paid by Brick kiln owners/Brick earth removers, per kiln, per annum a fixed number of bricks for every classified area.As a result of introduction of this system, the previous method to fix amount of royalty on brick earth to be paid @ Rs. 2.50 per cubic metre provided in Schedule II framed under Rule 26(i)(b) had ceased to operate.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioners is that provisions as incorporated under Rule 26-A and notifications issued therein by the State Government are ultra vires and in conflict to the provision of Section 15(1) and (3) of the Act, therefore, beyond the legislative competence of the State Government. Further grievance is even notification issued by the State Government in its power conferred by the new rule to re-classify areas in different categories and to determine number of bricks equivalent to brick earth to charge consolidated amount of royalty is quite arbitrary, irrational and unworkable.

(3.) In these backgrounds before proceeding to adjudicate the grievances of the petitioners, it would be advisable to notice some of the relevant provisions of the Act and Rules.