TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been replaced by the Coal Mines Nationalisation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1986. 2. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in this case, it is proper to refer to the background in which the aforesaid amending Act was passed. The Coking Coal Mines (Emergency Provisions) Ordinance was promulgated in the Year 1971, which was replaced by the Coking Coal Mines (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1971. In view of Section 3 of the aforesaid Ordinance/Act, management of all the Coking Coal Mines vested in the Central Government on and from 17.10.1971, being the appointed date. The Central Government appointed custodians to take over the management of the Coking Coal Mines. Such Coking Coal Mines remained under the management of the Central Government through the custodian during the period from 17.10.1971 to 30.4.1972. The Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972 came into force w.e.f. 1.5.1972, the appointed date. In terms of Section 4 of the said Act, on and from the appointed date the right, title and interest of the owners in relation to the Coking Coal Mines specified in the first schedule stood transferred to and vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mencement of the appointed date can make on difference to the position. The expenses were to be set off against the sale price of the stock to be received at the time of disposal. Therefore, the stock of coal had to be taken into account for balancing the position. Reliance on the definition of 'mine' and Section 10 of the Nationalisation Act to counteract the this conclusion cannot avail the appellants. Indeed, the submission advanced on behalf of the appellants is so much opposed to common sense logic of the matter that in the absence of a legislative mandate we have no hesitation in rejecting it. This Court was of the view that the sale price of the stock of extracted coal lying at the commencement of the appointed date had to be taken into account for determining the profit and loss during the period of management of the mine by the Custodian. 6. Thereafter the aforesaid Coal Mines Nationalisation laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 1986 as already mentioned above was promulgated, which was later replaced by the Coal Mines Nationalisation laws,(Amendment) Act, 1986. By Section 4 of the Amending Act aforesaid, Sub-section (2) was introduced in Section 10 of the Coking Coal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Coal Mines Act, as amended by this Act, had been in force at all material times, and no such statement of accounts or supplementary statement of accounts shall be called in question in any court on the ground that it had not been prepared in accordance with the normal commercial practice or that any them has or has not been included in such statement, and accordingly no suit or other legal proceeding shall be maintained or continued in any court- (i) for the recovery of any sum on the ground that the amount to the owner under Section 10 or Section 11 of the Coking Coal Act or under Section 8 of the Coal Mines Act, does not include the amounts required to be paid in respect of all coal or coke in stock or other assets referred to in Clause (a); or (ii) for the recovery of any sum as being the excess of receipts over payments on the ground that the statement of accounts or supplementary statement of accounts required to be prepared under Section 22 of the Coking Coal Act or, as the case may be, Section 19 of the Coal Mines Act, had not been prepared in accordance with the normal commercial practice or that any item has or has not been included in such statement. Explanation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... slation retrospectively, then subject to the legislative competence and the exercise being not in violation of any of the provisions of the Constitution, such power cannot be questioned. Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the Coal Mines Nationalisation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1986 clearly and specifically says that the said amendment to the Cocking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972 shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st, day of May, 1972. Sub-section (2) of Section 10 which has been introduced with retrospective effect says that the amount which has been mentioned in the schedule to be payable to the owner shall be deemed to include and deemed always to have included the amount required to be paid to such owner in respect of all coke in stock on the date immediately before the appointed day. The amount which is to be paid as compensation for acquisition of right title and interest of the petitioner in the coking coal mine in question, shall include the compensation for all coke in stock on the date immediately before the appointed day. It can therefore be said that the amendments which have been introduced retrospectively, have taken away the substratum of the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under a statute is removed by the subsequent enactment with retrospective effect, the binding nature of the judgment of the Court cannot be ignored. 11. In the case of Shri P.C. Mills v. Broach Municipality: [1971]79ITR136(SC) , Hidayatullah, CJ speaking for the Constitution Bench said: When a legislature sets out to validate a tax declared by a Court to be illegally collected under ineffective or an invalid law, the cause for ineffectiveness or invalidity must be removed before validating can be said to take place effectively. The most important condition, of course, is that the legislature must possess the power to impose the tax, for, it it does not, the action must ever remain effective and illegal. Granted Legislation competence, it is not sufficient to declare merely that the decision of the Court shall not bind for that is tantamount to reversing the decision in exercise of judicial power which the legislature does not possess or exercise. A Court's decision must always bind unless the conditions on which it is based are so fundamentally altered to the decision could not have been given in the altered circumstances, ordinarily, a Court holds a tax to be invalidity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting, during the period when the mine in question was under the management of the Central Government, because it shall be deemed that the compensation awarded to the petitioner included the price for such coal lying in stock on the date prior to the appointed day. Neither any compensation is to be paid for such stock of coal nor the price thereof is to be taken into account for the purpose of Sub-section (1) of Section 22 of the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act 1972. It need not be pointed out that Sub-section (1) of Section 22 shall be applicable where the statement of accounts is to be prepared in respect of each coking coal mine taking into account the expenditure incurred in raising the Coal and the price of the coal raised during the period when such coking coal mine was under the management of the Central Government or the Government company. In view of the aforesaid Sub-section (2) introduced in Section 10 of the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972 and Section 10 of the Coal Mines Nationalisation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1972, it shall be deemed that the compensation has been paid even for the stock of coal lying on the date prior to the appointed day. 13. O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
