The Federation of Indian Granite and Stone Industry has contested in the Madras High Court the methodology adopted by mining and geology officials in arriving at a loss of Rs 1.10 lakh crore to the exchequer due to alleged illicit quarrying in Madurai district.
The granite body, in its counter-affidavit before first bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan yesterday, claimed that the figure was based on officials' 'assumptions and presumptions' and not on well-settled trade practices.
The matter relates to a PIL by social activist Traffic Ramaswamy on which the court had appointed IAS officer U Sagayam as the legal commissioner to probe the allegations of illegal mining.
Appearing on behalf of the granite industry, senior counsel P Wilson said it has come to the federation's notice that the court was apprised that a loss of Rs 1.10 lakh crore was caused to the exchequer.
The Geology and Mining officials did not take into account the trade practices, it was submitted. Buyers were allowed allowances (to put out of sale purview) ranging from 5 cm to 20 cm depending upon the quality, colour, cracks and other natural defects. Such factors were not taken into account, it was pointed out.
However, all of a sudden, especially after August 2012, the officials started measuring "length x breadth x height" of the excavated granite pit. They measured it on volumetric basis and calculated it arithmetically without geological mapping and inputs, the federation contended.
Maintaining that this was an important aspect without which the actual percentage was determined by officials, the counter said any decision based on assumption and presumption will be flawed.
"The officials had adopted fanciful, imaginary export price while calculating the recovery and price of minerals," it charged.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing to 11 January next year.
The granite body, in its counter-affidavit before first bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan yesterday, claimed that the figure was based on officials' 'assumptions and presumptions' and not on well-settled trade practices.
The matter relates to a PIL by social activist Traffic Ramaswamy on which the court had appointed IAS officer U Sagayam as the legal commissioner to probe the allegations of illegal mining.
Appearing on behalf of the granite industry, senior counsel P Wilson said it has come to the federation's notice that the court was apprised that a loss of Rs 1.10 lakh crore was caused to the exchequer.
The Geology and Mining officials did not take into account the trade practices, it was submitted. Buyers were allowed allowances (to put out of sale purview) ranging from 5 cm to 20 cm depending upon the quality, colour, cracks and other natural defects. Such factors were not taken into account, it was pointed out.
However, all of a sudden, especially after August 2012, the officials started measuring "length x breadth x height" of the excavated granite pit. They measured it on volumetric basis and calculated it arithmetically without geological mapping and inputs, the federation contended.
Maintaining that this was an important aspect without which the actual percentage was determined by officials, the counter said any decision based on assumption and presumption will be flawed.
"The officials had adopted fanciful, imaginary export price while calculating the recovery and price of minerals," it charged.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing to 11 January next year.