IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 16*" my OF JULY, 2009
PRESENT .. V
THE HON'BLE MR. P.D. DINAKARAN, cH1Er=~.,Ju:sfr1oEo'»._" '
AND _ V' o lo
THE HON'BLE MR.JusTxcE v.e.s;1§i3'H'Ars1T V
WRIT PETITION No.20064 c._f_"g«.rm' B'l_l\"!*fSa']
8: WRIT PETITION N0" of g(i{)_9._,'~ _
(corre<:j;_e&,v1c3e;or'de:;'~.¢$td 27.8.2009) Q
Between: . =
3.Manjunath,
S/o Late B.}ayaram,
Aged about 52 years 1.,
P.W.D. & B.D.A. Class~I' lContrE~;ctor,:f:.;
No.1 Gangappa Garden, _
C.A. Road Smcross, Malle':=waram',.:'-»..,, A '
Bangalore, " " ' _ ' .. '
Bangalore ~ 560056.
. ...Petitloner
l~}agaraj'a"lsi"'l\laldu, Advocate)
And: .
1.; .,The State of«.Karn"ata'«5;a
Represented by its Secretary
Debartment 0-f_Cornmer{:e and Industries,
M5. Building, a " V
'E5a.nigaior'e--S60 O(}.1__ *
"'2,.'HT|éeoCwrirnisséoéoer,
"~B".»B.i'4.,P_.. (Bru'h'ath Bangalore Mahanagara Paléke),
Bangalore.
'-The Commissioner,
'~._B';'lI).A'.(Bangalore Development Authority),
Bangalore.
4. The Managing Director,
The Slum Clearance Board,
Shesadri Road,
Bangalore.
(by Sri Basavaraj l<aredcl"'y.,V it
This writ petition is filed under_v'Attic|es"'226i and 2i27"iof":the
Constitution of India praying to direct the 'respondentsi not to deduct
any royalty from the petitioner running w_ori<._bi-'lils; and 'etc._
This writ petition coming updfor pre?;imin'ary hearing this day, the
Court delivered the following:– ' v
fl -.-n………___.._—-.u.u…….
The petitioner ‘themregistered civil contractor
carrying on ci.vilH,_the:’ Department and Local
Bodies. It coiitevnd’eii:’i-that”‘for”t–he “purpose of execution of civil
works, the petitioner building materials from
the private;sou_rces4.u ‘-It lfurtherv contended that the petitioner does
nVot.ovi.’nVa’r’.l; is not liable to pay any royalty to the
resp’o{id’eynts;i the respondents are deducting royalty from
‘ V>,th.e bills ‘ofllthe vpeititioner without authority of law. Hence, the petition
not to ‘deduct the royalty from the bills of the petitioner in
of”–the materials procured by them from private sources for
.exec-‘ution of the civil contract works.
2 K
giwwc
..;..F{esp_onde:rits.
3
2. In similar matters, this Court in e.v. KUMAR AND oTH’e.i§s_:v«,,,_
STATE or-‘ KARNATAKA AND OTHERS in Writ Petitions%$:o,”:3V:i2«6%i§’v–…T’ ~
31266 of 1994 disposed of on 31″ October, }994 has”é’aio:’_vdo\;*tin”!:Vhe,,it
principles relating to the payment of royaity by-..t|Aji=: con’tra’ctors.:’w-,]’he_, i
same are extracted hereunder:
(a) Where providing the material ‘(subjected to rVoyalty)V}is
the responsibility of the conti’aci’otf’anhdsithe Departmevnt
provides the contracforii’with-,Spec:’fied.t;orrcw areas, for
extraction of the required construction’ ~l.:rnat-erial, the
contractor will be liahlehvltojpay ‘ro!yaltyV’ charges for the
material 3,/Vmir’i%Jr’_Vri1inerai) extracted “from such areas,
irrespe’cti’ve”–.oi'” ‘|.l’.’*’.’r’_}e’|’.’f”.l’é?:l”‘-.Vkt.’\f’i'{“.’__ “contract is a item rate
Coi)t”i’£’Ci:V.VC3::”agltimfl “sum. contr-~.ct._»*’: Hence deduction of
royalty. ch’a..rgesv”in s:.ich..__cases will be legal. For this
purpose non–execi1tion.’hVof, mining lease is not relevant,
as th’e,__iiahility toV’pay_rgyalty arises on account of the
, –::–ontractor..extracting material from a Government land,
‘ ‘5¥.for_,use_ in the”work,. r
‘(‘!;I)”‘ _W’.h,ere_’under the contract the responsibility to supply
the (minor minerals) is that of the
V Depai’trn,ent/employer and the contractor is required to
it provideéonly the labour and service for execution of any
L worit involving use of such material, and the unit rate
V “*_.does not include the cost of material, there is no liability
“ion the contractor to pay any royalty. This will be the
position even if the contractor is required to transport
the material from outside the work site, so long as the
unit rate is only for labour or service and does not
include the cost of material.
(C) Where the contractor uses material purchased.,ln:”open.;’ .
marked, that is material purchasedfrom priv’ate sources ‘
like quarry lease holders Or private’».;4;rua:fry’..o’wn’ers,’~th’ere” ‘
is no liability on the contractor topay anyy.royaity’
charges.
(d) In cases covered byparas (h)—and-.(‘c,’.. the Department
cannot recover or deduct any lfoyai’ty*from_ the bills of
the contractor and if so fdeducteci; tl7_e’Department will
be bound to refund any’a’mount’ so=.dedu.cteAd’»’or collected
tothecontra-L’f?.l’; i “_
(e) Subject ro::_’u_2e aboyef:collection} of royalty by the
Department or’ei§el’aind~.the.reof ehbythfle Department will be
gjoverzied vb tile» terms. _onf~contract.
(f) Nothing stated above be construed as a direction
_ -for refundyln’ regard to any particular contract. The
“5gDepartment”Orauthority concerned shall decided in each
case, vynether royalty is to be deducted or if any royalty
isV”a_lre»adyy_e deducted, whether it should be refunded,
–..,i~kéep§i_ng__ in[vJi’ew the above principles and terms of the
_ cOn~tra_ct;”
y ‘.i’iz.e;saici decision has been upheld by the Division Bench
£hi’s’vco:§;rt in the case Of OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF
‘ ‘e:t’be§AR1’MENT OI= MINES AND GEOLOGY v. M. MOHAMMED
5
HAJEE in Writ Appeai No. 830 of 2006 disposed of on 25″‘ septesn1;’e:_,
2006.
3. Following the judgment of this CourttrenderetdHifiuvétit .Ap_§_:’_):ea1a,,
No.83O of 2006 disposed of on 25″ Septe:’fiber; ‘2’€}061thEs.:betiVti:§i1..isvt.:
aiso disposed of. No order as to costsft
Ch.i§g1E’3]uStiC8
Sd/-
JUDGE
Index: YES / NO
Web host: YES] 1′ \
inn