Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: oilfields regulation and development act 1948 Court: karnataka Page 1 of about 761 results (0.182 seconds)

Jun 25 1993 (HC)

M/S. Muddureshwara Mining Industries Vs. P.G.R. ScIndia and Others

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1993Kant346; ILR1993KAR1967; 1993(3)KarLJ108

..... of public interest litigation as they felt that the royalty paid to state was extremely low and therefore, notifications issued under section 6a(4), oilfields (regulation and development) act, be quashed as illegal, invalid and unconstitutional. ..... for the disposal of these appeals, briefly stated, are as under :in exercise of the powers vested under section 15 of the mines and mineral (regulation and development) act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as the act) the government of karnataka made the rules known as 'karnataka minor mineral concession rules, 1969' (hereinafter referred to as the rules) ..... representatives who are thus obviously most competent to commence the litigation.in contrast, the strict rule of locus slander applicable to private litigation is relaxed and abroad rule is evolved which gives the right of locus standi to any member of the public acting bona fide and having sufficient interest in instituting an action for redressal of public wrong or public injury, but who is not a mere busy or a meddlesome ..... observance of the provisions of the constitution or the law which can be best achieved to advance the cause of community or disadvantaged groups and individuals or public interest by permitting any person, having no personal gain or private motivation or any other oblique consideration but acting bona fide and having sufficient interest in maintaining an action for judicial redress for public injury to put the judicial machinery in motion like actio popular is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 1955 (HC)

Firebricks and Potteries Ltd. Vs. Firebricks and Potteries Ltd., Worke ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : (1956)ILLJ571Kant

..... industries of the kind mentioned in the schedule of the industries (development and regulation) act, 1951, are many and have sprung up in several parts of india and disputes between the management and workers are a frequent occurrence. ..... a list of controlled industries is given in the schedule to the industries (development and regulation) act, 1951, and item 37 therein is said to apply to the business of which the petitioners are managers and respondents are employees. 2. ..... carried on by or under the authority of the central government or by a railway company or concerning any such controlled industry as may be specified in this behalf by the central government or in relation to an industrial dispute concerning a banking company or insurance company, a mine, an oilfield or a major port, the central government, and (ii) in relation to any other industrial dispute, the state government. ..... such delegation is not peculiar to this act and is found in other acts too as the legislature cannot ascertain or anticipate the conditions and circumstances pertaining to the numerous industries in the country with the facility and advantage the government has. ..... it is not likely that the central government intended to determine the means of setting all these; and the words emphasize this by provoking that the industries in which it will exercise jurisdiction are to be specified. 3. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 01 2001 (HC)

H.V. Thimmegowda and Others Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2001CriLJ3156; [2002(94)FLR928]; ILR2001KAR3683; 2001(4)KarLJ548

..... the industries (development and regulation) act, 1951 vide act 46 of 1981, section 2'. ..... , (e) 'employer' means- (i) in relation to an establishment, which is a factory, the owner or occupier of the factory including the agent of such owner or occupier, the legal representative of a deceased owner or occupier and, where a person has been named as a manager of the factory under clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 7 of the factories act, 1948, the person so named, and (ii) in relation to any other establishment, the person who, or the authority which has the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment ..... - (i) in relation to an establishment belonging to, or under the control of, the central government or in relation to an establishment connected with a railway company, a major port, a mine or an oilfield or a controlled industry or in relation to an establishment having departments or branches in more than one state, the central government, and (ii) in relation to any other establishment, the state government, (aa) 'authorized officer' means the central provident fund commissioner, additional central provident fund commissioner, deputy provident fund commissioner, regional provident fund commissioner or such .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1993 (HC)

State of Karnataka Vs. Dundamada Shetty

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1993KAR2605; 1994(3)KarLJ378

..... transfer executed by the government for the time being, the right to all precious metals, precious stones, coal and other minerals to be extracted by any process of mining from any lands whatsoever, shall vest absolutely in the government, and the government shall, [subject to the provisions of mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1948 (central act liii of 1948)], have all the powers necessary for the proper enjoyment or disposal of such rights:provided that- (1) nothing ..... in this section shall be deemed to apply to limestone, granite and such other ordinary minerals as the government, by notification in the official gazette, may from ..... supreme court in : [1970]2scr100 supra had already held in paragraphs 18 & 20 of the report that the central act, namely the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act 1957, had occupied the field of conservation and development of minerals and therefore, the state legislature would have no jurisdiction or competence to enact any law touching upon this field and hence the state legislation would be beyond the scope of entry 23 of the state list, that this was an acquisition .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1989 (HC)

Nanjanayaka and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1990Kant97; 1989(2)KarLJ202

..... ' by amendment act i of 1956 words '(subject to the provisions of mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1948 (central act l1ii of 1948)' have been inserted between the words 'government shall..... ..... provided under any law in force before the commencement of this act or under the terms of any grant made or of any other instrument of transfer executed, by on behalf of the government for the time being, the right to mines, minerals and mineral products, shall vest absolutely in the state government and the state government shall, subject to the provisions of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1957 (central act 67 of 1957) have all the power necessary for the proper ..... s, 70 of the land revenue act itself states that right to mines and minerals and mineral products absolutely vest in state government save as expressly provided under any law in force before the commencement of this act or the terms of the grant and that vesting shall be subject to the provisions of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1957. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 1971 (HC)

K.N. Srinivasachari and anr. Vs. the State of Mysore

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1972Kant66; AIR1972Mys66; (1971)2MysLJ189

..... . the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1948, (hereinafter referred to as the central act of 1848) is one of the central acts in the schedule to the part b states (laws) act, hence under section 6 of the part b states (laws) act, the central act of 1948 repealed with effect from 1-4-1951 any law in force in the former mysore state corresponding to that act.26 ..... 8, 10 and 11 of the mysore mines act, were superseded by the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the central act of 1957') which came into force on 1-6-1958 and thereafter those sections of the mysore mines act ceased to be in force and that it was not competent for the authorities of the state to issue any license under the provisions of the mysore mines act or to enforce the conditions contained in such license or to place any restrictions on the activities of goldsmiths in the kolar gold fields ..... . the central act of 1948 which was, in turn, repealed by the central act of 1957, was also an act to provide for regulation of mines and for the development of minerals .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1972 (HC)

Laxminarayana, Mining Co. and anr. Vs. Taluk Development Board and anr ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1972Kant299; AIR1972Mys299

..... case the validity of the orissa mining areas development fund act (27 of 1952) was questioned on the ground that the orissa state legislature had no power to pass the said act in view of the provisions of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act. ..... central act 67 of 1957 contains the requisite declaration by the union parliament under entry 54 and that act covers the same field as the act of 1948 in regard to mines and mineral development, we consider that the decision of this court concludes this matter unless there were any material differences between the scope and ambit of central act 54 of 1948 and that of the act of 1957 ..... hingir rampur coal company's case, : [1961]2scr537 , the supreme court observed as follows:--'it is only necessary to add that the validity of this impost was affirmed, however, for the reason that whereas the orissa act, the central act of 1948 was a pre-constitution law and as in terms of entry 54 'parliament' had not made the requisite declaration, but only the previously existing central legislature it was held not to be within the terms of entry ..... after stating the law as extracted above, the supreme court disposed of the above case on the ground that the declaration contained in the 1948 act with which they were concerned and which had been made by the dominion legislature before the constitution came into force, was not sufficient to take away the jurisdiction of the state legislature under entry 23 of list ii of the seventh schedule .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 16 1965 (HC)

Kolagada Chennabasappa Vs. State Government of Mysore and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1966Kant167; AIR1966Mys167

..... venugopalachari did not attempt to take the stand that any of the provisions of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1957, and mineral concession rules, 1960, were contrary to article 14 of the constitution. ..... he did not also dispute the fact that the rights and obligations of the persons applying whether for prospecting licences or mining leases, as well as the competence of the specified authorities dealing with the same, would all be as regulated and controlled by the provisions of the act and the rules. ..... if the competence of the central government to issue such a direction cannot.....be questioned in their absence and if the state government to act in accordance with the direction, then, the petitioner will not be entitled to contend that those applications should not have been considered by the state government. ..... the petitioner has further alleged that in granting the said prospecting licences, the authorities have acted in disregard of the relevant provisions of the act and rules, and in an arbitrary and discriminary manner so as to offend article 14 of the constitution. ..... 14 has been violated, he has not established that under the provisions of the act and the rules there remained to him any right in respect of which he could properly invoke the jurisdiction of this court under art. ..... the petitioner has not established that there was no adequate remedy provided under the act and the rules.the position is as stated by the supreme court in a.v. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 2001 (HC)

Suresh R. Shetty Vs. Senior Geologist, Mines and Geology Department, M ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR2001Kant225; 2001(4)KarLJ405

..... of condition 5 of the license/lease.the karnataka minor mineral concession rules, 1994 have been framed by the government of karnataka in exercise of power under section 15 of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1957 herein referred as 'central act no. ..... itself, if necessary for carrying on the work of crushing stones or work of quarrying is not prohibited but is regulated that it is not to be carried within 200 metres from the railway boundary or other public works, or buildings ..... the act of 1957, the state government has been conferred power to make rules for regulating the grant of quarry lease, mining lease or mineral concession in respect of mines and minerals and for ..... what is provided by rule 6(2) or paragraph 5 of the terms and conditions is regulation of quarrying operations and it provides that if quarrying operations are to be carried on without any blasts, then the quarrying operations shall not be carried on within a distance of 50 metres from the boundary of any railway ..... respondent to the petitioner to show cause why action should not be taken for violation of rule 6(2) of the karnataka minor mineral concession rules, 1994 and before the show-cause notice was served, the tahsildar under the order of the deputy commissioner forcibly stopped the working of the crusher and the petitioner could not be able to work the crusher in spite of his holding the licence. ..... the lease is vested in the competent authority and as such they have to act independently. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 1966 (HC)

Sree Ramakrishna Mining Company Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1967]64ITR197(KAR); [1967]64ITR197(Karn)

..... it) on the ground of the belatedness of the said application (ii) whether a partnership formed for working mines on the assignment on permission of a person, who held a valid lease from the state government, is hit as being prohibited by the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1948, and the rules made thereunder (iii) and even if there is there no prohibition, is a partnership of the type mentioned entitled to registration (iv) even if the assignment mentioned in question no. ..... question asks us to say whether a partnership for continuing mining operations, or an assignment made by a person who holds a lease or on his permission, is prohibited by the mines and mineral (regulation and development) act, 1948 (to which we shall refer as 'the act') and the mineral concession rules) to which we shall refer as 'the rules'.) 10. ..... , therefore, asked to say that there was no transfer by thiruvengadam to venkatarama chetty, and that if nevertheless the partnership was formed for working a mine without such transfer, the agreement of partnership was what was forbidden by law or the consideration for it was of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1948, and the mineral concession rules. ..... undisputed that a certain thiruvengadam chetty was the grantee of mining lease under the provisions of the mines and minerals (regulation and development) act, 1948, and the mineral concession rules, 1949. .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //