Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2016 (1) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 1409 - SC - Indian LawsEffect of amendment - Rule 8(8) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 which was amended by G.O. Ms. No. 391 dated 17.11.2000 - whether the amendment would have retrospective effect or will become operational prospectively i.e. only from 17.11.2000? HELD THAT:- Rule 8(8) of the 1959 Rules which prescribes period for grant of lease is not procedural but substantive in nature. By amendment, change in the said Rule was effected with the classification of areas into "virgin area" and "other areas that is non-virgin areas". It is only in respect of virgin areas that the period of lease stands enhanced to ten years whereas in respect of other areas the period of lease continues to be five years. This was clearly a substantive amendment which had nothing to do with any procedure. There was no concept of "virgin area" in the unamended rule which has been introduced for the first time by way of aforesaid amendment. An error is committed by the High Court in holding that fixation of period of lease is also procedural. When a decision to grant lease is substantive in nature, the period for which the lease is to be granted would also be substantive. Thus, the conclusion arrived at by the High Court is contrary to law. It is to be borne in mind that a particular provision in a procedural statute may be substantive in nature and such a provision cannot be given retrospective effect. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|