Sharanagouda B Patil vs The State, 4 Ors, on 19 September, 2008

.. 'twin. - nuns sun-vials: an av-unit:-ur1I\.r'\ I-1u.7r: VAJLJIKI yr RAKJVAIA . .
EU-\ HIUH LI

IN THE HIGH coum' OF KARNATAI{A  f}.  %

cmcurr BENCH AT (3~ULBAI%'f~'~u{ if 'T    _

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAYOF._SEPTEBrfBEi?':2DQ8v'jV ' 'A V

BEFORE  "    %
'I'HE HONBLE MR.' s.VB¢FA1~m.r;j
w.p.No.4Q33e12éi>8 {ma ~--.'l'\'»'i';\'.£:_'.;'»_}E
BEIWEEN:  t 'L   

Sharax1ago_».2.:da'_B Pzlxtil,   ' " '
S/o.BasavL3n11faygo1'1ds;, _ " ' "" "

A351 abbut»-450"Y€31'$':§f"-.L  . ;

Occ:Q1ass.jI"CQnt1*actof,' ~ V

No.9-5o/T%:,27-1%:;8, 

Behind  I

BasaveshWaran{&gai5,_  . . ' ,..~

Shahapur 'rq;- Gizmarga District.  PETYFIONER

 Sari G G  Adv.)

H "    of Karnataka,

 Régsrescnted by its Secretary,
.. " .Mines & Geology Deparmaent,
 M 3 Building, Bangalore---360 001.

The Chief Engineer,
KBJNL, Zone No. 1,
Bhimarayanagudi.

3. The Executive Enginmr,
JBC Division No.3,
Chighalli Camp,
Taluk Jewargi, Distzfiulbmga

J2

'3



---- - nu-cusps'. 33

4. The Executive Engineer,
M130, 0 & M Division,

Chigarahalli Camp,

Taluk Jcwargi, Dist: Guibmga.  

(By Sri M Kumar, AGA)

This W.P is filed under    22?; i

Constitution of India, praying   the"m:sp0:jcifivj?ng:~__  - _

Sri    - ,":vj.'}< fif:erI'11:r1ent Advocate to

accept nfbfiéé'    £9 4.

2. The  {ms Court claiming to be a

_..   carrying on civil works such

 *.as of canals, roads, buildings drainages etc

 of the State and also: for

 ' 'local  it is the contention of the petitioner
V    'jib: findertak3n' g such contract work, the miner
  required such as jelly, sand etc are purchased

   the petitionars from quarry owners and also fiom

other private saumes. Hence the petitioner contends

L

'1



that since the petitioner himself does not undertake the

quarrying work, he is not liable to pay myalty 

of such minor minerals and the   

erronecusly deducted royalty. fie' fofa O

mandamus to direct the   to 

royalty from the bills of  sinsistww

the petifioner to pmdpce gihe   réceipts by

their Vendors.

3. Though4.fi;t¢    made in the
petition, V1  same need not be
adverte<i;_ to'  far noticing that the

petitioner    O 1' who does not undertake

4_..  'work   but purchases minor mineral

«V 9t.h;<_~:r, sajiirfses. In respect of such cases, the

 V of this Court in several matters

 part1cV '   the case of av. KUMAR AND OTHERS

  s*:%m: OF KARNATAKA (W.P.NO.31264-266/1994

   31.10.1994) has issued dirwtions which read

V V '* A O" fellows:

..... . uwuni ur IuIui!'uI|II-\lU\ 1-Ilurl CQVURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNAYAICA HIGH C1

i

4:
f



KAINNAKA HSGH COURT G' KAil\W'AKA HIGI COUXT OF KAINATAKA HIGH C1

"a) Where providing the mate1'i5a1_
(subjected to royalty) is A'
responsibility of the     .

the department  

contractor with     .
areas for extractiim  :7 
construction   c:1n€;a;:_Vf.ar:§

will be liable t0:pay myalty 
for thf:   A 'miné1'a1)
extracted 2 " areas,
_<;~f eonaact is
fa' ' fjxfiem    lumpsmn
  d_§¢duct:on of royalty

_ ....  will be 1%

 "For  V  non-execution of

  not relevmlt, as me

. f  the contractor extracting
 fiom a Gavenlmcnt land, for

'  in the Work.

Z  b)" Where under the ooxmact, the
'  responsibility to supply the matarial

._. . ..._..n- vs: nu-n\I1.I"urli\l"'| l"I2IJI"I  U!'    

(minor minerals) is the}: of the
Demfinant/cnzpiaycr and tin
contractor is required to pmviride only
the labour and service for execution
cf any work involving use of such

J2

1'

IE



 ...._.,_.§.. vr mmnmm men COURT or KARNATAKA men COURT or KARNATAKA men COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH c

material, and the unit rate does not

include the cost of material, there 

no liability on the contractor to .4
any royaity. This will be the     »
even if the centractor is  _ 
transport the   '1  . 
the work site, so lofig {he   

is only fer pr sexnrz" 

not include  cfxmaieiijail, 

c) Where th§: -  fuses maternal'

 ép(;I1_ 'fiiafkétg that is

 A  " faom private
     holders or
j.   there is no
_ % _¢1§:i:h.e éontractor to pay any
" .._  ' . 

 d)" ewaed by paras (b) and

_  %  the department cannot recover or
1 __  any royalty from the bills of
 ihe contractor and if so deducted, the
department will be bound to refund

any amount so deductcdxr coiiected
to the contractor.

Jz

'0



nu wr-nu-III:-1 1 ll\II I \-\l\Jl\l 'nil' l\l'§lKI'F\I.F\I\I'\ H33"     

e) Subject to the above, collection of

royalty by the deparatnent or 
thereof by the department willf .4
governed by the terms of mflfifghbj '. 'Q    ~

!) Nothing stated.-' ""abovAe"._   
construed as a  *~fibr1refu1§d7<.'
regard to   

The departzlfefit' _ ora  

 A  .   

whether  deducted 03' it'

are   ro:,'aiw?. is   deducted.
   'above principies

 %%%%    id connect "

4. I~Ier1ceA'«t1V'1e  bf the matter has been
covered zjmder  'dons and in this regard, it
    évrespondents to verify as to

w1{ett:Vicr” uepgauoner is entitled to the benefit under

T’ It is needless to mention that if the

‘A ” jietjfiener pufchases from outside sources, the same

wgmdhaée to be established by the petitioner before the

V _ VT dyxfiiefifies by filing a Iepresentation. The pet1t1’ ‘otter is

at liberty to seek for refund of the myalty, if any

}

‘¢

n-urn

. …,…… .,.- …-….m…..ua mun eougr or xnaunmm ma:-I COURT or KARNATAKA men COURT or i(ARNA?AKA HIGK com”: or xnmnmxn HIGH co

deducted so far and also to indicate that the royalty

should not be deducted. On such represexltationgheirxg

made by the petitioner, the respondents

the same keeping in View the ”

The petition accordingly    -'

order as to costs.

Sri S.S.Kt:mm£-m,fi    ' V ent Advocate is

permitted     appearance.

Sd/-~

Bme Judge