In Brief
The petitioners, mining leaseholders, challenged the validity of Explanation(s) to Rule 38 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 2016 and Rule 45 of the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules, 2017, which require royalty to be computed on the basis of sale value without deducting previously paid royalty and contributions to District Mineral Foundation and National Mineral Exploration Trust. The petitioners argued this creates a cascading/compounding effect on royalty and lacks intelligible differentia with the treatment of coal. The Supreme Court held that while the mechanism may be onerous, it is within the executive's policy-making domain on economic matters and cannot be struck down absent statutory breach. The Court directed the respondents to conclude pending public consultation within two months and take a final decision on the anomaly.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.