Ashish S/O Manikrao Yenchilwar vs State Of Maha. In The Ministry Of ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8393 Bom

                               1

                                                25-8-2022-WP-674-2022.odt




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                Writ Petition No.674 of 2022

Shri Ashish S/o Manikrao Yenchilwar,
Aged 30 years,
Occ. Business,
R/o Deulgaon, Taluka Armori,
District Gadchiroli.                                    ... Petitioner

     Versus

1.   State of Maharashtra,
     In the Ministry of Revenue & Forest,
     Mantralaya, Mumbai-32,
     Through its Secretary.

2.   The District Collector,
     Gadchiroli.                                        ... Respondents


Ms Ramaa A. Kukday, Advocate for Petitioner.
Smt. K.R. Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents.

        CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.

DATE : AUGUST 25, 2022

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.) :

1. Considering the limited prayer, Rule. Rule is made returnable

forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader

Smt. K.R. Deshpande waives service of notice for the respondents.

2. In the auction of sand ghats for Gadchiroli District held on

19-3-2019, the bid of the petitioner was found to be highest for one of

the sand ghats. The petitioner deposited the requisite amount, after

which an agreement was duly executed. The Collector issued a

25-8-2022-WP-674-2022.odt

dealer's licence in favour of the petitioner on 3-10-2019. While

seeking renewal of the said licence, the Naib-Tahsildar visited the site

for ascertaining the stock of the sand. He however drew the

panchanama and seized the sand to the extent of 4131 brass. This

action was challenged in Writ Petition No.1426 of 2020. That writ

petition was however withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to

initiate separate proceedings in the matter of the sand remaining after

the petitioner was permitted to transport 1263 brass of sand.

Thereafter the petitioner on 27-8-2021 has made a representation to

the Collector seeking refund of the amount admissible with regard to

2883 brass of sand. It is the grievance of the petitioner that this

representation has not been considered.

3. In these facts, since the period of almost one year has elapsed

from the petitioner's representation, it is directed that the respondent

No.2- Collector shall decide the said representation within a period of

four weeks from the receipt of the copy of the judgment. If the

Collector finds it necessary, he is free to grant an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner. The decision taken on the representation

shall be communicated to the petitioner.

4. Rule is disposed of in above terms. No costs.

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.) Lanjewar Digitally Signed By :P D LANJEWAR Signing Date:25.08.2022 17:41