High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri.Pratap Kodibarao vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri.Pratap Kodibarao vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 June, 2009
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & V.G.Sabhahit
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQR.iV§V.__t'~i.V

DATED THIS THE 10"' DAY OF JUNE zoos: *- 

PRESENT _o-_

THE HON'BLE MR. 9.0. DINAKARAM, c;:'i-'iIési=«'J.o$T1CE[ii.i,o.i 

AND 7' V
THE HON'BLE MR.Jj1usTIcEflV-.»t<3.~sAi3HAi{TT 

WRIT FLEIITION No.1'4b9i3--.gt%.;;4_1;(;9;{iGiM-MM-s)

Between:

Sri Pratap KOdiba_."30'   _ V  
Contractor, Age: 3'32 y'e_ars"'---- . "  _  V.
R/0 KiragunaVwa.di"'i*a|"uk1;:Au.'ad V  "
Dist. Bidar     

V _ ' ' ...PetItIoner
X _ (By  Kriashampur, Advocate)
          
1  V State"  E§ia'r:r1a.taka
R€pr'e_sen"ted._by'..Its'Secretary

Departmentoff Mines and Geoiogy
M.S. ":3uiic1vi'ngv 

 'VE§angaio.re  560 001

  :fT»he 'tExec:titive Engineer

      Bidar

' _P';2i'3':i.c_?ii'i!orks Ports and Inland
 Water Transport Division Bidar





3. The Executive Engineer
Panchayat Raj Engineering
Division, Bidar

...,Responi_dentsi' 

(by Sri Basavaraj Kareddy, GA  'a..nd_R~2).cl.:_"  

This writ petition is filed under. Articles  ancl_';Z27 of"

Constitution of India praying to dire'c--t._theArespondentjs»..,itiot_»to

deduct royaity from the bills of the petitioner”and’~in’ot to insist
the petitioner to produce the roya_l_t_y”~,paid receipts by their

vendors and direct the respondents to refiind”i’t]’ie roya’l’ty”already
deducted from the bills of the petit.ione;fi.’ ; ” ‘ ‘T ‘

This writ petition” comirig”‘upf hearing this
day, the Court deliver’e’d.,,ti1e f=ollQw.ii’ig:~e

it ‘(VD’elive oifia i<"a'ran, c.:i .)
The petitioner registered civil contractor
carrying on civilv'cw~ori<s. the Government Department and Local
Bodies. V-'It*is;,_A–i::oii.tended'that for the purpose of execution of civil

works,» tritegypvetitiorieris required to purchase building materials

'VV..___.from private Vsoiijrclesli it is further contended that the petitioner

not any quarry and that he is not liable to pay any

roii':a»!ty'llto' the respondents. However, the respondents are

royalty from the bills of the petitioner without

_ authority of law. Hence, this writ petition praying not to deduct

3

the royalty from the bills of the petitioner in respect

materials procured by them from private sources for .

the civil contract works. _

2. In similar matters, this ,.CourtV4’i»n

OTHERS v. STATE or KARNATAI(l»§”*iAN$ ‘0.THE’R§”:,:iun”Writ

Petitions No. 3138461266 or’ ‘1,994.w*d’i’spos;eVd”of on’31*”‘t ‘October,

1994 has laid down the principlleshi’rve:laVtin.g””i–to.Viii2»e payment of

royalty by the contr,act’ors:–. The sense a,revi’e~x,tVra”tfted hereunder:

(a) Where-»pro.vidingRthehirnateriail (subjected to royalty)
the–.respo’tisibili’ty::”of contractor and the
lfiepartmevnlt’.Vp.rovides__.the Contractor with specified
borrovvi. areas;’V.,V’for”«-._ extraction of the required

.construction’material, the contractor will be liable
pay royal_ty___charges for the material (minor
r}..ine_)}a«.g_ extracted from such areas, irrespective of

= vv:’a,ethVer:the contract is a item rate contract or a
A lunitfisilni contract. Hence deduction of royalty
charges in such cases will be legal. For this purpose

a n__on–execution of mining lease is not relevant, as
the liability to pay royalty arises on account of the
contractor extracting material from a Government

land, for use in the work. f,…..:.fl\

(b)

(C)

4

Where under the contract the responsibility to

supply the material (minor minerals) is that of then it

Department/employer and the

required to provide only the labour and service—- for ‘7’

execution of any work involving use_.~ol’.. .

material, and the unit rate does not injclucle. t’he_
cost of material, there is no; liability they
contractor to pay any royalty. Th_ls” will :b’ej_the

position even if the contrac’tor is “‘rec;uiri:d ‘to

transport the material from—-ou”tside.._the vvorktsitté,
so long as the unit rate _is’onl;yrfor».labo’ur or service
and does not include the _cc?$’t’Vo’li’ material. _

Where the c;oritrac”tor€uses”mat’el’ial…iJurchased in
open i’rnarjl<eci,"'5'.that-sis 'rn_at_erial purchased from

private sources'i'iike'~iquarry lease holders or private

quarry yow'.n_e&-.=.;. the_re»"is no liability on the

_contra'c.tor to p.ay3any…royalty charges.

cases Axc"ov~——recl by paras (b) and (c) the

Depal'trnent cannot recover or deduct any royalty

«1frorn_ti".et' -bills of the contractor and if so deducted,
Vi the.'D'epartment will be bound to refund any

zainount so deducted or collected to the contractor.

Subject to the above, collection of royalty by the
' Department or refund thereof by the Department

will be governed by the terms of contract.

…… “”

K” /'”?*<-.

contractor_¢.._is.