Bombay High Court Quashes Seizure and Fine in Minor Mineral Transport Case — Tractor Carrying Murum for Filling Potholes Not Illegal Mining. Use of Tractor for Personal Purpose Without Royalty Receipt Does Not Attract Penalty Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Prakash Tumdu Chaudhari and Sujit Prakash Gujrati, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging the seizure of a tractor (MH-18-A-9229) and the subsequent show cause notice dated 15.12.2018 and order dated 31.12.2018 passed by the Tahsildar, Nandurbar. The tractor was seized on 18.11.2018 while transporting murum (a minor mineral) without a royalty receipt. The petitioners contended that the tractor was owned by petitioner No.2 and lent to petitioner No.1 for personal use to collect murum from an agricultural field to fill potholes in front of his house. The Mining Officer seized the tractor and issued a show cause notice under Section 48(8)(1) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue (MLR) Code, demanding a fine of Rs. 1,04,300/-. The petitioners argued that the transportation was for personal use and not for commercial purposes, and thus the seizure and penalty were illegal. The court, after hearing the parties, quashed the show cause notice and the order imposing fine, and directed the release of the tractor. The court held that the use of the tractor for personal purpose without royalty receipt does not attract penalty under the MLR Code.

Headnote

A) Mining Law - Seizure of Vehicle - Minor Minerals - Section 48(8)(1) of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - The petitioners challenged the seizure of a tractor and show cause notice/fine for transporting murum without royalty receipt. The court held that the tractor was used for personal purpose (filling potholes) and not for commercial mining, and the seizure and penalty were not justified. (Paras 1-4)

B) Mining Law - Personal Use Exemption - Minor Minerals - Section 48(8)(1) of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - The court considered that the minor mineral was collected from an agricultural field for filling potholes, which is a personal use, and thus the requirement of royalty receipt does not apply. The show cause notice and order imposing fine were quashed. (Paras 3-4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the seizure of a tractor and the imposition of a fine for transporting minor minerals (murum) without a royalty receipt, when the minerals were collected from an agricultural field for personal use (filling potholes), is sustainable under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court quashed the show cause notice dated 15.12.2018 and the order dated 31.12.2018, and directed the respondents to release the tractor bearing No.MH-18-A-9229 to the petitioners.

Law Points

  • Seizure of vehicle for transporting minor minerals without royalty receipt
  • Show cause notice under Section 48(8)(1) of MLR Code
  • Penalty for unauthorized mining
  • Personal use exemption
  • Quashing of notice and order
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (12) 43

Writ Petition No. 3882 of 2019

2022-12-14

Mangesh S. Patil, Y. G. Khobragade

Mr. M. V. Ghatge for petitioners, Mr. A. S. Shinde, AGP for respondents

Prakash Tumdu Chaudhari and Sujit Prakash Gujrati

The State of Maharashtra and others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India challenging seizure of tractor and imposition of fine for transporting minor minerals without royalty receipt.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of show cause notice dated 15.12.2018 and order dated 31.12.2018, and release of seized tractor.

Filing Reason

Tractor seized while transporting murum for personal use (filling potholes) without royalty receipt; show cause notice and fine imposed under Section 48(8)(1) of MLR Code.

Issues

Whether seizure of tractor and imposition of fine for transporting minor minerals without royalty receipt is valid when the minerals are used for personal purpose? Whether the show cause notice and order under Section 48(8)(1) of MLR Code are sustainable?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the tractor was used for personal purpose (filling potholes) and not for commercial mining, hence no royalty receipt required. Respondents argued that transporting minor minerals without royalty receipt is illegal and attracts penalty.

Ratio Decidendi

Transporting minor minerals for personal use without royalty receipt does not attract penalty under Section 48(8)(1) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. Seizure and fine in such cases are not justified.

Judgment Excerpts

By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are praying to quash and set aside the order/notice dated 15.12.2018 and 31.12.2018 issued/passed by respondent No.4 – Tahsildar. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner No.2 is the registered owner of tractor bearing MH-18-A-9229, which he purchased for agriculture purpose, however, on 18.11.2018, he had lent the said tractor to petitioner No.1 for personal use, who collected acne (murum) and was transporting the same to fill up patholes.

Procedural History

The tractor was seized on 18.11.2018. Show cause notice under Section 48(8)(1) of MLR Code was issued on 15.12.2018. Order imposing fine of Rs.1,04,300/- was passed on 31.12.2018. The petitioners filed the writ petition on an unspecified date. The petition was reserved on 02.12.2022 and pronounced on 14.12.2022.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966: Section 48(8)(1)
  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Termination of Temporary Employees in Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation. Petitioners, appointed as temporary employees, were terminated without notice; court held that temporary employees have no...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal for Counting Casual Labour Service as Qualifying Service for Pension in Kerala Fisheries Department Case. The Court held that pension is a social welfare measure and that the appellant's casual labour service should be cou...