https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168392 For minor minerals, the State Government's power to fix and enhance royalty was upheld as flowing from the Act's scheme, history, and related provisions; it was not confined to the ceiling suggested by Item 54 of the Second Schedule. The requirement to lay the notification before the State Legislature under Section 28(3) was treated as directory, so non-placement did not by itself invalidate the 28 September 1994 notification, though placement was directed. The enhancement was also found not to be confiscatory, arbitrary, or otherwise illegal on the facts. The challenge to the royalty notifications therefore failed and the appeals were dismissed with costs. en-us Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Feb 2015 18:00:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168392 For minor minerals, the State Government's power to fix and enhance royalty was upheld as flowing from the Act's scheme, history, and related provisions; it was not confined to the ceiling suggested by Item 54 of the Second Schedule. The requirement to lay the notification before the State Legislature under Section 28(3) was treated as directory, so non-placement did not by itself invalidate the 28 September 1994 notification, though placement was directed. The enhancement was also found not to be confiscatory, arbitrary, or otherwise illegal on the facts. The challenge to the royalty notifications therefore failed and the appeals were dismissed with costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168392