Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
PETITIONER:
SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED ETC. ETC.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
CENTURY TEXTILES AND INDUSTRY LTD. AND ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT04/04/1991
BENCH:
RANGNATHAN, S.
BENCH:
RANGNATHAN, S.
KASLIWAL, N.M. (J)
CITATION:
1991 AIR 1593 1991 SCR (2) 188
1992 SCC Supl. (1) 460 JT 1991 (2) 595
1991 SCALE (1)660
ACT:
Constitution of India, 1950; Schedule VII List I Entry
54 and List II Entries 23, 49, 50 and 66-Mineral areas
development-Cess imposition of-Competency of state
Legislature of legislate.
Article 142, 246 and 265 - Statute declaration of
invalidity Refund-Whether automatic and inevitable
consequence.
Madhya Pradesh Karadhan Adhiniyam 1982 |Madhya Pradesh
Areas Development Cess Rules 1982-Ss.8,9| Rule 10-Mineral
Areas development-Cess-Imposition of.
HEADNOTE:
The levy of cess under the Madhya Pradesh Karadhan
Adhiniyam 1982 is not a valid levy has been held by the
Madhya Pradesh High Court in Hiralal v. State of M.P., 1986
MPL J/514 and this has been confirmed by this Court in its
judgement dated April 4, 1991 in the appeal preferred by the
State of Madhya Pradesh.
Despite the judgement of High Court the amounts
collected from various assessees had not be refunded. The
State was continuing to collect the cess on the strength of
interim orders in an appeal filed in this Court.
The State Government and the Coalfields concerned
preferred petitions for leave to appeal to this Court.
Disposing of the appeals, this Court,
Held (1) The collection of any cess under the Madhya
Pradesh Karadhan Adhiniyam 1982 subsequent to the date of
the judgement of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Hiralal’s
case 1986 MPLJ514 cannot be upheld.[190D]
(2) The respondents will not be entitled to the refund
of any cess paid or collected prior to the date of said
judgment. They would however, be entitled to the refund of
the amounts collected subsequent to
189
that date from the Coalfields or the State, as the case may
be, along with the interest in cases where there is an
interim direction or undertaking to pay such interest at the
dates specified in such direction or undertaking.[190E]
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5501 of
1990 etc. etc.
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.8.1990 of the
Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc P.N. 845 of 1990.
R.B. Datar, Satish Agnihotri, P.S. Nair, T.G.N. Nair
and Shri Narain for the Appellant.
R.F. Nariman, Abhay Sapre, Sandeep Narain and S.K.
Agnihotri for the Respondents.
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by
RANGANATHAN,J. These Civil Appeals and SLPs raise the
same issues as have been dealt by us in our judgement of
even date in Civil Appeal No. 1640 to 1662 of 1986 and
connected cases. They arise in the following circumstances.
In the connected judgment referred to above we have
held that the levy of cess under the Madhya Pradesh Karadhan
Adhiniyam, 1982 (Act 15 of 19820 is not a valid levy. In
fact it had been so held by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in
Hiralal v. State of M.P., [1986] MPLJ 514. The appeal
preferred by the State of Madhya Pradesh has been disposed
of by us in the connected batch of cases above referred to.
Despite the judgment of the High Court the amounts
collected from various assessees had not been refunded; on
the contrary, the State appears to have continued collecting
the cess apparently on the strength of the interim orders
obtained in one of the above appeals viz. C.A. No. 1649/86
though, as pointed out by us in the connected judgement no
such modification seems to have been ordered by this Court
of the initial order of 2.5.86.
In April/May, 1990, some of the assessees filed writ
petitions in the High Court challenging the continued
recovery of the cess and asking for the refund of amounts
already collected. The respondents brought to the notice of
the Court the orders of this Court in the
190
earlier matter and pleaded that since the collections were
being made in pursuance of the orders of this Court the writ
petitions could not be entertained. The High Court rejected
the respondent’s plea and allowed the writ petitions. The
Coalfields concerned and the State Government have preferred
petitions for leave to appeal from the order dated 28.7.90
and 22.8.90 in these cases. In one set of these appeals
lave has been granted by us earlier:C.A. Nos. 5501 and 5502
of 1990. The other SLPs had been listed before us
subsequent to our hearing the main appeals and it was agreed
that suitable orders may be passed thereon in the light of
the conclusion we reach in the main batch of appeals. we
grant leave to appeal in all the Special Leave Petitions
and proceed to dispose of all the appeals by this judgment.
These appeals have to be disposed of in the light of
our judgment in the connected batch of cases referred to
above. We have held there that the collection of any cess
under Act 15 of 1982 subsequent to the date of the judgement
of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Hiralal’s case [1986]
MPLJ 514 cannot be upheld. For the reasons set out in the
judgment in the connected cases,s we hold that the
appellant will not be entitled to the refund of any cess
paid or collected prior to the date of the said judgment.
They would, however, be entitled to the refund of the
amounts collected subsequent to that date from the
coalfields or the State, as the case may be alongwith
interest in cases were there is an interim direction or
undertaking to pay such interest at the rates specified in
such direction or undertaking.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
With these observations these appeals are disposed of.
V.P.R. Appeals disposed of.
191