STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. OM PRAKASH BRICK KILN OWNER
LAWS(SC)-2025-1-87
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on January 21,2025

STATE OF PUNJAB Appellant
VERSUS
Om Prakash Brick Kiln Owner Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ABHAY S.OKA,J. - (1.)The appellants are the original defendants, and the respondents are the original plaintiffs. The respondents filed suits against the appellants for a permanent injunction restraining them from assessing, levying or recovering any amount as royalty from the respondents on account of the use of earth by the respondents for making bricks. According to the respondents who were operating brick kilns, they took different lands (for short, 'the said lands') from private owners on lease.
The respondents used to excavate earth from the said lands to manufacture bricks in their brick kilns. The respondents' case was that no part of the land was vested in the Government and according to the Wajib-ul-arz, brick earth does not belong to the State Government. Reliance was placed on Sec. 42 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (for short, 'the Land Revenue Act') and, in particular, sub-sec. (2) thereof. It was further contended that under the Mines and Mineral (Regulations and Development) Act, 1957 (for short, 'the 1957 Act') or under the Punjab Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1964 (for short, 'the Mineral Rules'), there was no provision entitling the first appellant - State Government to levy royalty on the use of brick earth. The respondents contended that the appellants' action of assessing royalty and sending notices for recovery was illegal.

(2.)The appellants resisted the suit by filing their written statements. It was contended that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit in view of Rule 54F of the Mineral Rules, which provides a remedy of appeal against orders of assessment of royalty. The appellants also raised objections to the maintainability of suit on the ground of nonjoinder of necessary parties. It was contended that the respondents had failed to implead the owners of the said lands.
The appellants further challenged the maintainability of the suit for want of a notice under Sec. 80 of the Civil Procedural Code, 1908. On merits, it was contended that according to Wajib-ul-arz of the village Jallalabad, every mineral, including brick earth, vests in the first appellant - State Government in accordance with Sec. 42 (2) of the Land Revenue Act. The appellants also contended that under Sec. 15 of the 1957 Act, the State Government was empowered to make Rules for making a provision for charging royalty. Accordingly, under the Mineral Rules framed by the State Government, the appellants were entitled to levy royalty.

(3.)The Trial Court dismissed the suit vide judgement dtd. 22/8/1983. The Trial Court rejected the appellants' preliminary objections regarding the bar of suit and nonmaintainability of the suit. The Trial Court held that on the plain reading of Sec. 42 of the Land Revenue Act, in a case where the record of rights was completed before November 18, 1871, and there is no express provision made therein that any forest or quarry belongs to the landowners, the same shall be presumed to belong to the State. The Trial Court held that the record of rights regarding the land in question was made before 18/11/1871, and since the Wajib-ul-arz did not specify that the quarries belonged to the land owners, it was held that the subject quarry is vested in the State Government in terms of Sec. 42 (1) of the Land Revenue Act. The Trial Court further held that by a notification issued under Sec. 3(e) of the 1957 Act, brick earth was declared a minor mineral. The Trial Court held that even though the settlement in the years 1911-12 and 1962-63 did not show the subject land as a quarry, that was not significant as, at that time, brick earth was not declared as a minor mineral.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.