Jharkhand High Court
Rajendra Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 5 April, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 2868 of 2021
Rajendra Yadav ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Government of
Jharkhand, Ranchi
2. Secretary, Rural Development Department (Rural Works Affairs),
Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. Chief Engineer, Rural Development Department (Rural Works
Affairs), Jharkhand, Ranchi
4. Executive Engineer, Rural Development Department (Rural Works
Affairs), Works Division, Koderma ... ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Gaurav Raj, AC to AAG-II
-----
Order No. 06 Dated: 05.04.2022
The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of
direction upon the respondents to release the balance amount from
the final bill of the petitioner under the head of royalty on the earth
work which, according to the petitioner, is beyond the terms of
agreement.
2. It is jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the
parties that the present writ petition is covered by the order dated
23.12.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 1882 of 2021
[Bhagirath Saw Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.].
3. Perused the order dated 23.12.2021 passed in the
aforesaid writ petition, the relevant paragraphs of which read as
under:
"2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the
respondents referring to clause 3.3 of Section-III
Part-2 of the special conditions for F2 contract which
provides as under:
"If the Royalty clearance certificate for
mines/minerals used in the work is not
produced with the bill, Royalty will be
deducted from the concerned running bill,
as per instruction of the Department of
Mines. Production of royalty clearance
certificate along with the final bill is a
must, failing which final bill will neither be
passed nor paid, and for such non-
payment or delay in payment, the whole
and sole responsibility will be of contractor
alone."
3. It has also been stated in the counter affidavit that
the issue raised by the petitioner in the present writ
petition has attained finality in terms with the
judgment dated 28.06.2016 passed by learned
Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 705 of 2015
(The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Vs. M/s. MRKR-Pallavi-
Upkar JV through its authorized signatory M.Vasudeva
Reddy & Ors.) and other analogous cases wherein it
has been held that the contractors are liable to make
payment of royalty as per Entry No. -19 of the
notification dated 27.12.2010 issued by the State of
Jharkhand in exercise of power conferred under
Section 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Development
and Regulation) Act, 1957. It has also been held in the
said judgment that the State authorities are at liberty
to recover the amount of royalty with respect to
"ordinary earth used for filling or levelling purposes in
construction of embankments, roads, railways,
buildings" under Entry No.-19 of the notification dated
27.12.2010.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it
thus appears from the aforesaid stand taken by the
respondents in the counter affidavit that an amount of
Rs.8,00,000/- has been deducted from the final bill of
the petitioner under the head of royalty as per Entry
No.-19 of the notification dated 27.12.2010 issued by
the state government. Though the issue of deduction
of royalty to be charged for use of ordinary earth has
been settled by the learned Division Bench of this
court in L.P.A. No. 705 of 2015 and other analogous
cases, yet the respondents have not given the
details/breakup of deduction of Rs.8,00,000/- made
from the final bill of the petitioner with respect to
work done in pursuance of agreement no. 05 F2 of
2018-19.
5. The aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for
the petitioner appears to be justified as the
respondents, even in the counter affidavit have not
given the details/breakup of deduction of royalty
towards ordinary earth made by them while making
payment of final bill to the petitioner.
6. Hence, the present writ petition is disposed of
directing the Executive Engineer, Rural Development
Department (Rural Works Affairs), Works Division,
Koderma (the respondent no. 4) to give
details/breakup of aforesaid deduction made from the
final bill of the petitioner within four weeks from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order."
4. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, in the
present case also, though the amount of earnest money as well as
security deposit has been adjusted in the final bill by way of royalty
on the earth work, yet details/breakup of the said adjustment made
from the final bill of the petitioner in pursuance of Agreement No. 03
F2 of 2018-19 have not been given to him.
5. Keeping in view that the present writ petition is similar to
W.P.(C) No. 1882 of 2021 which has already been disposed of by this
Court vide order dated 23.12.2021, the present writ petition is also
disposed of in terms with the said order.
6. Hence, the present writ petition is disposed of directing
the respondent no. 4 - Executive Engineer, Rural Development
Department (Rural Works Affairs), Works Division, Koderma to
provide details/breakup of the deduction/adjustment made from the
final bill of the petitioner within four weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Manish
