Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Agile Real Estate Private Limited, a real estate development company, owned lands at revenue village Balkum in Thane district, including Survey Nos. 203/13 and 203/14. On 5 May 2015, the State of Maharashtra issued a notification amending the Maharashtra Minor Minerals Extraction (Development and Regulation Rules) 2013, providing that no royalty shall be required to be paid on earth extracted while developing a plot if such earth is used for development of the same plot. On 30 March 2017, the Competent Authority granted the petitioner two permissions to excavate minor minerals to the extent of 20,000 brass and 10,000 brass respectively. On 13 April 2017, the Tahasildar, Thane (Respondent No.2) issued a notice calling upon the petitioner to show cause regarding excavation of 541 brass and 1502 brass on lands including the survey numbers. The petitioner replied on 25 April 2017, stating that it had paid all dues and possessed necessary permissions. On 1 November 2017, the petitioner received a notice dated 30 October 2017 and an order dated 6 September 2017, wherein the Tahasildar alleged that the petitioner had excavated 2043 brass of minor minerals and demanded payment of Rs.2,12,47,202 within seven days. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition. The court considered whether the demand was sustainable in light of the exemption notification and whether the order was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing. The court held that the notification dated 5 May 2015 exempting royalty on earth used for development of the same plot applied retrospectively, and therefore, the demand for royalty on earth excavated for development of the same plot was unsustainable. Additionally, the impugned order was passed without giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. The court quashed the impugned order and notice, and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's reply and pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - The impugned order demanding royalty was passed without giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice - Held that such an order cannot be sustained (Para 5). B) Mining Law - Minor Minerals - Exemption from Royalty - Notification dated 5 May 2015 amending the Maharashtra Minor Minerals Extraction (Development and Regulation Rules) 2013 exempts royalty on earth extracted during development of a plot if used for development of the same plot - The exemption applies retrospectively to the period prior to the notification - Held that the demand for royalty on earth excavated for development of the same plot is unsustainable (Paras 4, 6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Tahasildar's order demanding royalty on earth excavated from the petitioner's land is sustainable in light of the Notification dated 5 May 2015 exempting royalty on earth used for development of the same plot, and whether the order was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order dated 6 September 2017 and notice dated 30 October 2017, and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's reply dated 25 April 2017 and pass a fresh order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Law Points
- Retrospective application of exemption notification
- No royalty on earth excavated for development of same plot
- Natural justice principles
- Opportunity of hearing before imposing demand
