JUDGMENT/ORDER :

1. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the captioned writ petition is taken up for final hearing.

2. Issue Rule, returnable forthwith. Ms. Dharitri Pancholi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. By way of this petition under Article-226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:

"(A)THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASE TO allow present petition by issuing appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the action of the respondent qua seizing the Truck No:GJ- 05-YY-9006, and thereby direct the respondent release the Truck forthwith, in the interest of justice.

(B) THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO allow present petition by passing order and issuing appropriate directions to the Respondent for releasing the Truck No: GJ- 05-YY-9006 and thereby direct to the Respondent to drop the proceeding as no illegality is committed by the petitioner as per rule 12 of Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rule, 2017, in the interest of justice.

(C) THIS HON'BLE COURT WOULD BE PLEASED TO grant interim relief by directing the respondent to release the Truck No:GJ-05- YY-9006, on suitable terms and conditions, which was seized by the Respondent, till pending admission hearing and till final disposal of present petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

(D) THIS HON'BLE COURT WOULD BE PLEASED TO grant such other and further relief/s as may be deemed fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. It is the case of the petitioner that on 06.10.2021 the respondent Mines Supervisor alongwith other officer came for inspection of Stock holders, wherein the truck of the petitioner was found in an unloaded stationary condition, the respondent had seized the truck, though there was no connection with the checking of stock holders (Stockyard of Sand Mineral). In any case the petitioner has not committed any offence which falls under the ingredients of rule 12 of Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rule 2017.

5. The petitioner is owner of Truck No.:GJ-05-YY- 9006 and earning his livelihood from the occupation of transport and accordingly, the petitioner vehicle Truck bearing No.GJ-05-YY- 9006 (hereinafter referred to as 'the vehicle in question') had gone for the loading with the sand material at Dholai Village, wherein truck of the petitioner was park for loading with the sand mineral. On same day at above evening the officer of the respondent came for checking with the stock holders and as part of the checking the respondent had seized the truck of the petitioner. The unloaded Truck is seized and Form J is issued.

6. Mr. R.K. Mansuri, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that as is clear that the vehicle came to be seized on 06.10.2021 by the respondent No.2 and since then vehicle is lying with the respondent authorities, no steps worth the name have been initiated by the respondent, much less filing the F.I.R. as provided under sub-clause (ii) of sub-clause (b) of sub-Rule (2) of Rule 12 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules of 2017"). It is submitted that in absence of any F.I.R. registered beyond the specified period, the action of the respondent authority seizing the vehicle, is illegal and against the principles laid down by this Court in the case of Nathubhai Jinabhai Gamara v. State of Gujarat, rendered in Special Civil Application No.9203 of 2020. It is submitted that this Court has categorically held and observed that if the complaint is not registered as envisaged under sub-clause (ii) of sub-clause (b) of sub-Rule (2) of Rule 12 of the Rules of 2017, in absence of the complaint, the competent authority will have no option but to release the seized vehicl