1 wp21.05.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 21 of 2005
Rakesh P.Verma,
Govt. Civil Contractor,
Kanhar Toli, Gondia - 441614 ...... PETITIONER
...VERSUS...
1. State of Maharashtra,
through the Secretary, Revenue and Forest
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
2. Collector, Gondia,
3. South East Central Railway,
through the Divisional Engineer,
First Floor, D.R.M.'s (Engg.) S.E.C.
Rly's Office, Kingsway, Nagpur ...... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
None for Petitioner.
Shri V.P.Maldhure, AGP for Respondent nos. 1 and 2
None for respondent No.3 Railway.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, AND
Mrs. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
th DATE : 7 JULY, 2017 .
ORAL JUDGMENT (P.C.)
1] None for petitioner.
The petitioner was engaged as a Contractor of Respondent No.3 - South East Central Railway, Nagpur, for ::: Uploaded on - 12/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2017 00:16:46 ::: 2 wp21.05.odt raising platform as per agreement dated 31.12.2003. It is at the instance of Railways that the contractor excavated the land belonging to the Railways and the minor mineral i.e. Murrum excavated was transported in the quantity of about 1000 to 1200 brass. A demand notice was issued to the petitioner for recovery of royalty of Rs.12,500/- at the rate of Rs.50/- per brass for 250 brass and the penalty at the rate of 3 times the cost of minerals as provided under Section 48(7) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code was demanded. The notices are dated 15.12.2004 and 21.06.2004. The penalty imposed was of Rs.3,80,020/-.
2] Perusal of the communication dated 26.04.2004 issued by Respondent No. 3 - South East Central Railway clearly indicate that the petitioner was neither at fault in excavating the minor minerals for using it to raise the platform and for transportation. The stand of the Railways in a return filed in this petition is that, it is the property of the Railways and the Collector has no authority to recover either the royalty or penalty either from the petitioner or from the respondent No.3 - Railway Authority.
::: Uploaded on - 12/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2017 00:16:46 :::
3 wp21.05.odt
3] In view of above, it is clear that the petitioner is
not at all responsible either for payment of royalty or for penalty. If according to respondent Nos. 1 and 2, it is the respondent No. 3 Railways which has to pay an amount of royalty and penalty in question, it is open for them to issue show cause notice to the Railways and proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.
4] In the result, writ petition is allowed. The notices of demand dated 21.06.2004 and 02.12.2004 issued to the petitioner by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are hereby quashed and set aside. It is held that the petitioner is not liable to pay royalty or penalty for the excavated minor mineral i.e. Murrum. No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Rvjalit
::: Uploaded on - 12/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2017 00:16:46 :::