M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN all these writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the authority of the State of Jharkhand, Department of Mines to issue executive order/resolution revising the surface rent of the land held by the petitioners as mining lessees. In all these writ applications, since common question of law and facts are involved, they have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) THE petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ for quashing the resolution as contained in memo No. 1055 dated 17.6.2005 whereby and where under the State Govt. has arbitrarily changed the rate and mode of calculation of the surface rent for the area used by the lessee for mining purposes and thereby decided that the entire land under the lease for mining purposes will be commercially valued and 5% of the valuation so arrived and will be charged as the surface rent and further for declaring the aforementioned resolution as illegal, void and contrary to the rule making power of the Govt. in respect of both major and minor minerals and further for quashing the demand notice issued by the respondents whereby surface rent has been demanded in terms of the aforesaid resolution. In all the writ petitions, petitioners' case is that they were time to time, granted mining lease as per the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (in short MMDR Act), Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (in short MC Rules) and Bihar Minor Mineral Concession Rule now, Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules 2004 (in short MMC Rules) in respect of major and minor minerals. Petitioner's case is that being holder of mining leases for minerals, they are paying all statutory levies, royalty and surface rent as specified in the lease deed in the statutory form K as per the provisions of MMDR Act and M.C. Rules and MMC Rules. The petitioner are paying surface rent of the area of land actually occupied and used by them at different villages at the rate specified by the State Govt. in terms of the Rules and pursuant to the lease deed or Form K which is being accepted by the State Govt. Surprisingly the State Govt. came out with a resolution signed on 16.9.2005 whereby and where under the State Govt. has purported to change the rate and basis of calculation of surface rent for the entire area of land occupied by the petitioners lessees for mining purposes. In the said resolution rate of surface rent has been calculated taking into consideration the commercial value of the entire area of land as per the valuation chart obtained for the purpose of calculating the stamp duty in case of transfer and yearly charge of 5% of the said value as surface rent. Petitioners' case is that in terms of the impugned notification the District Mining Officer illegally and arbitrarily issued demand notice dated 4.1.2006 in WPC 596/2006 demanding a sum of Rs. 1,10,37, 910/ - and 1,17,7,164 as surface rent from the petitioner in respect of two mining leases for the period 17.6.2005 to 31.12.2005. In all other cases, similar demand have been raised enhancing exorbitant surface rent in respect of both major and minor minerals.
(3.) THE respondent -State has filed counter affidavit stating, inter alia, that for the purpose of calculation of surface rent from the mining lessee a provision has been made under Rule 27(1)(d) of the M.C. Rules, 1960. It is further stated that under Rule 29(1)(gha) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, surface rent is to be charged at the rate specified by the Collector from time to time for an area occupied or used by the lessee. The respondents' further case is that surface rent has been revised after a very long gap of 83 years taking into account that huge amount of lands for mining purposes is used as commercial use.;