Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.78 seconds)Bhagwan Dass vs State Of U.P. And Ors on 24 March, 1976
"........The expression "minor mineral" as defined in Section
3(e) includes `ordinary clay' and `ordinary sand'. If the
expression "minor mineral" as defined in Section 3(e) of the
Act includes `ordinary clay' and `ordinary sand', there is no
reason why earth used for the purpose of making bricks
should not be comprehended within the meaning of the word
"any other mineral" which may be declared as a "minor
mineral" by the Government. The word "mineral" is not a
term of art. It is a word of common parlance, capable of a
multiplicity of meanings depending upon the context. For
example the word is occasionally used in a very wide sense
to denote any substance that is neither animal nor
vegetable. Sometimes it is used in a narrow sense to mean
no more than precious metals like gold and silver. Again, the
word "minerals" is often used to indicate substances
obtained from underneath the surface of the earth by digging
or quarrying. But this is not always so as pointed out by
Chandrachud, J. (as he then was) in Bhagwan Dass v. State
of U.P."
State Of West Bengal And Ors. vs Jagadamba Prasad Singh And Ors. on 30 July, 1968
"........In the context of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation &
Development) Act, we have no doubt that the word `mineral'
is of sufficient amplitude to include `brick-earth'. As already
observed by us, if the expression `minor mineral' as defined
in the Act includes `ordinary clay' and `ordinary sand', there
is no earthly reason why `brick-earth' should not be held to
be `any other mineral' which may be declared as a `minor
mineral'. We do not think it necessary to pursue the matter
further except to say that this was the view taken in Laddu
Mal v. State of Bihar, Amar Singh Modilal v. State of
9
Haryana and Sharma & Co. v. State of U.P. We do not agree
with the view of the Calcutta High Court in State of West
Bengal v. Jagdamba Prasad, that because nobody speaks of
`ordinary earth' as a mineral it is not a minor mineral as
defined in the Mines and Minerals (Regulation &
Development) Act."
Section 3 in The Mines And Minerals (Development And Regulation) Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
The Mines And Minerals (Development And Regulation) Act, 1957
V.P. Pithup1Tchai And Anr vs Special Secretary To The Govt. Of Tamil ... on 30 April, 2003
15. The decision of this Court in Banarsi Dass Chadha
squarely answers the question posed before us. However, the
learned Senior Counsel for the appellants heavily relied upon a
subsequent decision of this court in V.P. Pithupitchai and
Another v. Special Secretary to the Govt. of T.N.8 and submitted
that `ordinary earth' is not comprehended by the expression
`mineral'. That was a case where the question was whether
seashells could be termed to be `mineral' within the meaning of
the Act, 1957.
Article 136 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Banarsi Dass Chadha & Bros vs L.T. Governor, Delhi Admn. & Ors on 21 August, 1978
In the case of M/s. Banarsi Dass Chadha and
Brothers v. Lt. Governor, Delhi Administration and Others6, a
three-Judge Bench of this Court was seized with the question
whether `brick earth' is a `minor mineral' within the meaning of
5
(1976) 3 SCC 784
6
(1978) 4 SCC 11
7
that expression as defined in Section 3(e) of the Act, 1957.
Chinnappa Reddy, J. speaking for the Bench observed :