Rakesh P.Verma vs State Of Mah.Thr.Revenue & Forest ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 4198 Bom

                                                    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

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.

                                                      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