Nitin Mahadev Raut vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2831 Bom

                                                            904-wp-3157 OF 2022.odt



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     904 WRIT PETITION NO.3157 OF 2022

                          NITIN MAHADEV RAUT
                                   VERSUS
               THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                      ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Jadhav Hanumant P. AGP for Respondents : Mr. S.K. Tambe ...

CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA & S.G. MEHARE, J.J.

DATED : 23rd MARCH, 2022

PER COURT.:-

1. The petitioner has impugned the communication dated

28.01.2022 issued by respondent no.4, Tahsildar imposing penalty of

Rs.7,50,000/- against the petitioner which is confirmed by the order

dated 17.02.2022 passed by respondent no.3.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that his

client has borrowed the amount from the bank for purchasing the said

vehicle in question and is seriously prejudiced in view of the order of

penalty of Rs.7,50,000/- imposed by the authority. He further states

that his client would file an appeal within a period of two weeks from

today before the Second Appellate Authority without fail and if there

is any delay, along with the application for condonation of delay.

Statement made by the learned counsel is accepted as and by way of

904-wp-3157 OF 2022.odt

an undertaking before this Court.

3. The learned counsel invited our attention to the

judgment of this Court delivered on 21.10.2020 passed by a Division

Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.6911 of 2020 in case of

Avadaji S/o Asaram Solankar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and

another, in support of his submission that the seizure order be stayed

by this Court during the period when the petitioner files appeal before

the Second Appellate Authority and would apply for further interim

reliefs before such authority.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that his

client would deposit 50% of the impugned penalty amount of

Rs.7,50,000/- with the office of Tahsildar within two weeks from

today without fail. Undertaking is accepted. It is made clear that the

Tahsildar shall release the said vehicle to the petitioner only upon the

petitioner depositing 50% of the penalty amount with the office of the

Tahsildar and not prior thereto.

5. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not file an

appeal within a period of two weeks from today before the Second

Appellate Autority, the interim protection granted by this Court would

stand vacated without reference to the Court. The appellate authority

to decide whether to direct the petitioner to deposit any further

amount for granting stay to the order of penalty imposed by the

authority below. The Second Appellate Authority shall decide the

904-wp-3157 OF 2022.odt

matter on its own merits without being influenced by the fact that this

Court granted the order of release of the vehicle on payment of 50%

of the penalty amount subject to the outcome of the said appeal.

6. Writ petition is disposed off in the aforesaid terms. No

order as to costs.

7. Parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

8. It is made clear that the amount that would be deposited

by the petitioner would be subject to the further order that would be

passed by the Second Appellate Authority.

  (S.G. MEHARE. J.)                              (R.D. DHANUKA, J.)




Mujaheed//