[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Kantibhai Mangabhai Vasava vs State Of Gujarat on 10 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14545/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14545 of 2025
==========================================================
KANTIBHAI MANGABHAI VASAVA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKIT B PANDYA(5906) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
PRITHU PARIMAL(9025) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
MR NIKUNJ KANARA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 10/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned AGP waives
service of rule on behalf of the respondents.
2. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioners that the impugned order dated 07.03.2023 does
not take into consideration the contentions raised by the
petitioners by way of written submissions. The learned
counsel further submits that no reasons have been given
while imposing the huge penalty of Rs. 2,58,43,270/-. He
submits that the impugned order is in breach of the
principles of natural justice and therefore, the same be
quashed and the matter be remanded back for fresh
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14545/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026
undefined
consideration.
4. The learned AGP appearing on behalf of the
respondents submits that the petitioners were given ample
opportunity of hearing. He submits that thereafter, taking
into consideration various documents as enumerated in the
impugned order, the penalty, as assessed by the
respondents, has been inflicted on the petitioners. He
submits that the respondents authorities have also taken
into consideration the written submissions filed by the
petitioners. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order
is a reasoned order and the present petition be dismissed.
5. Considered the submissions of the learned counsels for
the parties and perused the documents on record. A perusal
of the impugned order shows that it is alleged that the
petitioner has illegally mined excess ordinary sand to the
tune of 76,369MT. After referring to various documents, the
impugned order has been passed. The respondent No.3 has
only stated that the written submissions were not accepted.
Further, no finding has been rendered with respect to the
contentions raised by the petitioners.
6. In the considered opinion of this Court, the impugned
order is in breach of principles of natural justice. The
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14545/2025 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2026
undefined
impugned order is an unreasoned order. It was imperative on
behalf of the respondent No.3 to take into consideration the
written submissions of the petitioners and adjudicate the
same by reasoned order before inflicting the penalty. The
impugned order cannot sustain in law. The impugned order
dated 07.03.2023 is accordingly quashed and set aside. The
respondent No.3 is directed to rehear and adjudicate the
show cause notice dated 21.10.2022 after giving due hearing
to the petitioners and thereafter, passing a reasoned order
adjudicating all the contentions so raised by the petitioners
in accordance with law and on its own merits.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the
merits of the case and no opinion is expressed thereon.
8. The Special Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to
costs.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
SALIM/
