IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREET
DATED THIS THE sth DAY OF JULY 2009 E E
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. inn. n1NAKARAqN;"cHIH1?
AND
THE HOIEPBLE
WRIT PETITION NO. ;_.19o42;45Vj2o09A (GMQMM-SV}'§
BETWEEN:
1. K.M.V. Parasada Rat) _ V'
8/ 0. Seetharama;'ai1j.. ._
Aged about 53'ye'ars;'j ' 4' _ '- _V
PWD Class E C0nt'_r'aetbr','w.. ,
R/o 8--3--E?6"1M'/VA;..:V5»_ 4' _
Sreenaga1*__Co_Eony,'*,~~.._» ' -
Hyderabad: 73. . V ..Petitioner
{By S_ri Nagaraja Advocates.)
I .".TheVState..of'Ka1ffia.taka
Represer1t,eVL£._«by its Secretary,
Department o"f--Ct;mmerce and
v Industries, V M. Building,
--Bangal"'ore"-7 560 001.
Stgpefihtendent Engineer,
' Department of K.H.S.D.R.P
__ e(_Kat'riai:a.ka Heakth System Deveiopment
and Reforms Project),
=1-at Floor, PHI Buiiding,
n u"*Sheshadri Raod, Bangalore.
3. The Managing Director,
Department of B.M.T.C.,
Shanthinagar,
Bangalore - 27.
4. The Managing Director,
Department of K.S.R.T.C.,
Shanthinagar,
Bangalore - 27.
5. The Executive Engineer,
Department of P.W.D.,
Annexure Building,
KR. Circle, Bangalore.
6. The Commissioner, - _ V _ _
Department of Karnataka Ij{6u'sing "
Board' ii ,-'
Cauvery Bhavalfhx. . . _a V
Bangaiore. g B-_...»RESPONDENTS
(By Sri Basaiiraraj
These write.peititio'ns"are,. iiieid imder Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of. India jpra-yihg to direct the respondents not to
deduct any royalty fro.r_nthe petitioner running work bills.
_ petitions coming up for preliminary hearing this
day; the aCogurt_rna'de' the following: -
ORDER
” ‘, ii”r.;(I§eiivered by PD. Dinakaran, C.J.)
i..f_’~’iihieapetitioner in these petitions is a registered civil
‘4Bff..con«tractoricarrying on civil works of the Government Department
Aahdigwtocal Bodies. It is contended that for the purpose of
execution of civil works, the petitioner is required to purchase
building materials from the private sources. It is
contended that the petitioner does not own any quarry ‘
he is not liable to pay any royalty to the _respondentsi.”‘iifioiisieyeyr, it
the respondents are deducting royalty:”:.froin~”the=.p’iils of?/”thTé:i1~i_:
petitioner without authority of law’.’i__v’Hence,’v~these
praying not to deduct the royalty frorniijtvhehilis or”-the petitioner
in respect of the materials pVrocured–. by;,’ijin’*i.Vfropn1.,,private sources
for execution of the civil contract» viiori<'s.,j__ ' '
2. in e.v. KUMAR AND
OTHERS v.:ir’isrA’rEVfvoé-:KA,i§ii_i§°rAkA AND OTHERS in Writ
Petitions No. disposed of on 315* October,
199%} hays’-i.E.a’i:dpi’down’ “t’hie,____pri»nciples relating to the payment of
roy.a_|ty;b”,’.,the_vcontractors. The same are extracted hereunder:
(la)? providing the material (subjected to
royalty) is the responsibility of the
L V ceatractor and the Department provides
‘the contractor with specified borrow areas,
‘ for extraction of the required construction
material, the contractor will be liable to
,,,,.i% N
E is E
,.- iv *9
pay royalty charges for the material’
(minor mineral) extracted from
areas, irrespective of whether the contract
is a item rate contract or a lump_–sumi:~.,>”*~’
contract. Hence deduction oi:’A4′:foyalty* ”
charges in such cases will be legai-._iF’or – .
purpose non-execution” of mining lease’ v .
not relevant, as the liabilitynto payroyaity
arises on account ti?-eé Vcontractobr
extracting material from, Government
land, for use in the’worl<.V '-
(b) Where underithe contract the; responsibility
to supply..t;7_e material minerals) is
of ‘:£?epa’rtnFient,’employer and the
contractor to provide only the
_l_abour~ arid_;s’.ervice””‘ll’or execution of any
wc__)’r’l<_invofv'in9.._use of such material, and
the,.unit_Vrate does not include the cost of
imiateiziaii.Viktheres is no liability on the
it con.tr':aictor to pay any royalty. This will be
the "position even if the contractor is
H 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. _'
Wpgwwm ,,
(c) Where the contractor uses material
purchased in open marked, that is,»–b’
material purchased from private sources,”
like quarry lease holders or private
owners, there is no liability:.,.q’n Ethel
contractor to pay any royalty charges.
(d) In cases covered by paras””elb) andV'(c)”‘lth’e
Department cannot recover. for deductbanyv
royalty from the bills of-.the’coriti’acto,r and
if so deducted, the Depai§tm’ent”~::iy’ill” be
bound to ‘;refu–nd any a..mouln’tj_so,deducted
or collect’ed7to’;’-th’e.contractor.’ H i
(e) Su.bject’_Atc:’lvji’heV abov,e,”~.collec.tion of royalty by
the D_epartni.ent’l’or’-rebifund thereof by the
Department will.’be.:§,°overned by the terms
4; ‘of,.contra’c.t_. ” V
‘stated above shall be construed as a
_ «l’dir:ecvti’on-,,.:for refund in regard to any
contract. The Department or
‘authority concerned shall decide in each
__ case, whether royalty is to be deducted or
if any royalty is already deducted, whether
it should be refunded, keeping in view the
above principles and terms of the
contract. ”
H Yes/ No.
j ‘vweidefiostz Yes/ No
3. The said decision has been upheld by the ”
of this Court in the case of OFFXCE o_,!=.e.1fHE ”
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLtSGYijr.A~
HAJEE in Writ Appeal No. 830 eff’2.oos’dsepes_ed.:e:é_;en…235*’?
September, 2006.
4. Following the ;’.(.idg_me;_r1t “rendered in Writ
Appeal No.83O pf’290%..c:ispe;:.ede..pr—“op_i 25″” September, 2005
these writ pe.titions .e”re’1’a;!_so d_i.sposec%-«of.v”No order as to costs.
Sch’-
Chief Iustica
Sd/-~
Judge