Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 114 (4.10 seconds)
Documents citing Thressiamma Jacob & Ors vs Geologist,Dptt.Of Mining & Geology ... on 8 July, 2013

Siddique Areekkan vs The Senior Geologist on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

Abdul Samad vs The District Geologist on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

Ashok George vs The Secretary To Government on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

Sainul Abdeen vs State Of Kerala on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

Eassa E.K vs The Senior Geologist on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

Eassa E.K vs The Senior Geologist on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

Tutu Jose vs The State Of Kerala on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

Eassa E.K vs The Senior Geologist on 19 December, 2025

Accordingly, the 1st respondent sworn in an affidavit. In the affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner had extracted minerals illegally from his property since 2016. In view of the finding on point No.(vii) that the State cannot claim royalty for minerals extracted by private persons from their own land that fall within the Malabar area prior to the Minerals Vesting Act, 2021, the 1st respondent cannot claim royalty from the petitioners for the minerals extracted prior to 30/12/2019. Hence, Exts.P1 and P2 in both the writ petitions to the extent they claim royalty prior to 30/12/2019 are liable to be quashed 82 Thressiamma Jacob v. Department of Mining and Geology, (2013) 9 SCC 725 WP(C) No.36843/2015 & conn.cases 2025:KER:97705
Kerala High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - K Edappagath - Full Document

M.I.D.C. Thr Its Ceo, Amravati vs Sau. Lilabai @ Sulbhabai Haribhau W/O ... on 24 April, 2018

In the present case also, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 has relied upon the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Threesiamma Jacob .vs. Geologist, Deptt of Mining and Geology, (supra), but, in the light of the aforesaid position of law, it cannot be of assistance to the respondent no.1.
Bombay High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - M Pitale - Full Document

Maharashtra Idustrail Development ... vs Prabhudas Bhagwandas Gothale & Ors on 24 April, 2018

In the present case also, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 has relied upon the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Threesiamma Jacob .vs. Geologist, Deptt of Mining and Geology, (supra), but, in the light of the aforesaid position of law, it cannot be of assistance to the respondent no.1.
Bombay High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - M Pitale - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next