“15. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench in the case of M/S R.C.N. Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein amongst the various issues so framed, one of such issue was whether the State Authority i.e. the Public Works Department, Railways etc. can deduct forest royalty from the bills/security deposit of the contractors in absence of any stipulation in the contract agreement empowering the employer State to do so. The Co-ordinate Bench had also decided the issue as to whether the contractor executing works for Government and its Departments are bound to procure minor minerals/forest produce only through permit granted under Rule 5 of the Rules of 2013. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court after taking note of various contentions opined that in absence of any contract condition, when a contractor is unable to produce a certificate showing the use of forest produce on which royalty has been collected, the recovery from the bills against the forest royalty cannot be made. It was also opined that those contracts where the Office Memorandum dated 17.06.2000 was a part of the contract and the same has been signed by the contractors and the employer, the contractors shall be bound by the Office Memorandum dated 17.06.2000 only when a specific clause was incorporated in the contract that the materials required should be collected either through permit etc. under the Rules of 2013 and/or through permit issued under the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891 and the Rules and Notifications issued thereunder. It is also seen from the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench wherein it was opined that Rule 5 of the Rules of 2013 is only a mode of permit provided under the Rules of 2013 and it is not mandatory always for a contractor under the State Agencies to procure the minor minerals through the permit issued under Rule 5 of the Rules of 2013. It was observed that the contractors would be compelled to do so when the contract conditions stipulated that the minor minerals must be collected through the permit under Rule 5 of the Rules of 2013. It was further observed that Rule 5 was not mandatory in each and every contractual work inasmuch as the Rules of 2013 itself provided that mining lease/contract/query permits can be granted under Rule 8 or Rule 18 or Rule 23 of the Rules of 2013 and therefore, the contractors are within their liberty to purchase/procure the minor mineral from other agencies who are holding mining lease/contract/query permits until the same is barred under the conditions of
