M. Katju, J. - (1.) -The petitioner is challenging demand of royalty vide notice dated 12.7.2002, Annexure-1 to the petition. The royalty is being charged under the U. P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is excavating earth from his own bhumidhari land and hence, no royalty can be charged. He has relied on the Supreme Court decision in Quarry Owner's Association v. State of Bihar, 2000 (8) SCC 655. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner proceeds on a misconception. Bhumidhari right is not proprietary right but tenancy right. No doubt, bhumidhari right is a very high kind of tenancy right because it is heritable and transferable, nevertheless it is not proprietary right. The proprietor of the land is the State in whom the land vests under Section 4 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. Thus, there is no force in this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed.;