https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192653 The article examines the legal meaning of "mineral" in mining legislation and the validity of treating brick-earth as a minor mineral. It explains that the term is to be construed in a broad, contextual sense, and that the legislative framework permits delegation to notify minor minerals; on that basis, the challenge to Section 3(e) and Notification No. G.S.R. 436 was rejected. It also addresses royalty under the Punjab Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1964, stating that recovery requires a subsisting lease, agreement, licence or permit. In the absence of such basis, royalty notices could not be sustained and were quashed. en-us Thu, 25 Mar 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jun 2017 14:38:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192653 The article examines the legal meaning of "mineral" in mining legislation and the validity of treating brick-earth as a minor mineral. It explains that the term is to be construed in a broad, contextual sense, and that the legislative framework permits delegation to notify minor minerals; on that basis, the challenge to Section 3(e) and Notification No. G.S.R. 436 was rejected. It also addresses royalty under the Punjab Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1964, stating that recovery requires a subsisting lease, agreement, licence or permit. In the absence of such basis, royalty notices could not be sustained and were quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 25 Mar 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192653