Bombay High Court
Sharad S/O Rajaram Ushire vs The State Of Maharashtra Thru The ... on 12 January, 2023
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, M. M. Sathaye
Yugandhara patil 901-WP-14906-2022(c).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 14906 OF 2022
Sharad S/o. Rajaram Ushire ..Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ..Respondents
----
Mr. Shashikant Gaikwad i/b Mr. Tukaram Venjane for the Petitioner.
Mr. A.P. Vanarase AGP for the Respondent/State.
----
CORAM : R.D.DHANUKA, AND
M.M.SATHAYE, JJ.
DATE : 12th JANUARY 2023
P.C.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mr. Vanarase, learned
AGP for the Respondents/State waives service. Heard finally by
consent of the parties.
2. By this petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, the Petitioner is seeking writ of certiorari to
quash and set aside Order dated 10.11.2022 passed by learned
Tahasildar, Baglan, District Nashik and direction to said Authority to
release the vehicle of the Petitioner bearing registration no. MH-41-
AU-9142, hereinafter referred to as 'the said Vehicle" for short.
1/ 5
::: Uploaded on - 16/01/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2023 22:06:12 :::
Yugandhara patil 901-WP-14906-2022(c).doc
3. It is case of the Petitioner that he is doing business of
transportation for which he is using the said vehicle. It is submitted
that the said vehicle and the business of transportation is the only
source of income for the Petitioner and his family.
4. It is further case of the Petitioner that on 01.11.2022, he was
transporting Gitti (metal stone) when the said vehicle was seized by
the Respondents' authority at Satana on the ground of illegal
transportation of Gitti; panchnama was drawn on 01.11.2022 and
accordingly show cause notice was also issued. Thereafter, the
Petitioner approached Tahasildar, Baglan and told that gitti (metal
stone) is not mine or mineral and requested to release his vehicle,
but without considering the said plea, Tahasildar, Baglan , District
Nashik, on 10.11.2022 passed order imposing fine of Rs. 32,725/-
on the Petitioner's vehicle exercising power u/s. 48 of the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. It is his case that on 14.11.2022,
he made an application to Tahasildar, Baglan contending that Gitti
(metal stone) or crushed stone is finished product and cannot be
treated as mineral for invoking provisions of Maharashtra Land
Revenue Code. However, no action is taken whatsoever on the said
application.
2/ 5
::: Uploaded on - 16/01/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2023 22:06:12 :::
Yugandhara patil 901-WP-14906-2022(c).doc
5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has invited our attention to
and relied upon Judgment dated 13.12.2018 delivered by Nagpur
Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 5466 of 2004 in case of
Bansilal S/o Lunkaranji Chandak(since deceased), through his legal
legal heirs Smt. Kantabai Bansilal Chandak Vs. State of Maharashtra
and Anr., Judgment dated 25.03.2022, delivered by single Judge of
Nagpur Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1579 of 2022 in case
of Sumit S/o Hargovind Lanje Vs. State of Maharashtra and others,
Order dated 01.07.2022 delivered by single Judge of Nagpur Bench
of this Court in case of Ramchandra Dadaji Tangle Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Another, and Judgment dated 25.08.2022 passed
by single Judge of Aurangabad Bench of this Court in Writ Petition
No. 8194 of 2022 in case of Vishal s/o. Laxman Shinde Jadhav Vs.
State of Maharashtra and others.
6. Mr. Vanarase, learned AGP for the State, filed Affidavit-in-
Replies of Respondent No. 3 (Tahsildar, Baglan) affirmed on
10.01.2023 and 11.01.2023 alongwith certain documents. We have
perused said Affidavit-in-Replies. In para 3 of affidavit dt.
11.01.2023 it is stated that in view of this Court's queries raised in
3/ 5
::: Uploaded on - 16/01/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2023 22:06:12 :::
Yugandhara patil 901-WP-14906-2022(c).doc
the light of some of above judgments, "it is better to give proper
hearing to Petitioner by withdrawing order under challenge".
7. We find that such statements are mere eye-wash. It is
impliedly conceded by concerned Tahsildar that proper hearing was
not given to Petitioner. Mr. Vanarase learned AGP for the State could
not distinguish the facts of this case from the facts of the aforesaid
judgments.
8. This Court in the aforesaid Judgments have taken consistent
view that gitti (metal stone) is a finished product and as such
provisions of Section 48 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
cannot be applied and for vehicle carrying Gitti (metal stone),
transit pass is not required. In this view of the matter, it is not
possible to take contrary view. Hence the petition succeeds and we
pass following order.
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (b) and(c).
(ii) Respondents are directed to release the vehicle of
Petitioner bearing registration No. MH-41-AU-9142, within
one week from the date of communication of this Order.
4/ 5
Yugandhara patil 901-WP-14906-2022(c).doc
(iii) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.
(iv) All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
[M.M.SATHAYE,J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.]
5/ 5
