M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN these two writ petitions the short question that falls for consideration is whether the petitioners are liable to pay interest on the late payment royalty and also whether interest on royalty is recoverable from the respondent as public demand.
(2.) THE petitioners ' case is that there are two Collieries known as Kurhurbaree and Serampur collieries in the district of Giridih. Kurhurbaree Colliery was a part of erstwhile Kurhurbaree Estate and by virtue of indenture the East India Railway Company took the lease of the said Colliery from the Secretary of State for India in Council and is recorded in Tauzi No. 15 of Giridih Collectorate. In the Khewat of this Tauzi, the then Secretary of State for India in Council is recorded as Khewatdar. Similarly, the Serampur Colliery was a part of erstwhile Serampur Estate and was formerly held by the East India Railway Company under a perpetual lease which vested in the Secretary of State for India in council by virtue of Eat India Railway company Purchase Act, 1879 and is recorded in Tauzi No. 10 of the Giridih Collectorate. In the Khewat of this Tauzi, the then Secretary of the State for India is recorded as Khewatdar. The petitioners ' further case is that the East India Railway Company worked the aforesaid two Collieries till they were nationalized and vested in the Union Government. The said Collieries thereafter worked by the Union Government as absolute owner thereof. In the background of the aforesaid facts, Mr. P.K. Prasad, learned Counsel appearing for the CCL, submitted that since the aforesaid two Collieries are owned by the Central Government as absolute owner, in respect of the proprietary right thereof, the said Collieries cannot be the subject matter of vesting under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950a nd, therefore, no rent or is are payable to the State of Bihar. Learned Counsel further submitted that since no royalty in respect of the said Collieries is payable to the State Government, the question of payment of interest on royalty does not arise. Learned Counsel relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries and Anr. V/s. Union of India and Ors., AIR 2001 SC 8.
(3.) THE respondents -State in their counter affidavit have stated that the petitioners sold these two Collieries to different consumers and realized royalty on behalf of the State Government. But this amount of royalty was not deposited in the accounts of the State Government, although the amount of royalty was relating to the period from 1977 -78 to 1995 -96. The petitioners deposited the amount of royalty in 1996 -97 in four instalments and started paying current royalty from 1997. Besides the above, it is stated that by virtue of operation of Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 , the Collieries in question came in possession of the State of Bihar and the State of Bihar became the owner of the said Collieries.;