STATE OF TAMIL NADU versus M.P.P. KA VERY CHETTY

The first proviso to Rule 19A is constitutional; valid differentia exists between State companies/corporations and private miners justifying preference for lease grants. Rules 8D and 19B are ultra vires the Act as State Government lacks power to regulate sale and minimum sale price of already mined minerals.

Parties: Appellant: State of Tamil Nadu; Respondent: M.P.P. Kavery Chetty
Jurisdiction: India
Judgment Date: 19 January 1995
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeals Disposed of
Outcome: Appeals disposed of; allowed in part
Legal Topics: Rule Making Powers, Mineral Concessions, Preference to State Companies, Constitutional Validity, Quarrying Leases

Mining Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Rule Making Powers Mineral Concessions Preference to State Companies Constitutional Validity Quarrying Leases

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

State of Tamil Nadu

Appellant

M.P.P. Kavery Chetty

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeals Disposed of

Legal Issues

1 Whether the first proviso to Rule 19A of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 is unconstitutional for giving preference to State companies or corporations
2 Whether Rules 8D and 19B are ultra vires as being beyond the rule-making power of the State Government

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeals disposed of; allowed in part

Orders

High Court judgment and order set aside insofar as Rule 19A as amended is held bad in law.
High Court judgment affirmed as to Rules 8D and 19B being bad in law.