SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT AURANGABAD
AMBADAS MANIKRAO SAUDAGAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS – Respondent
WP 7873/2019



(1) 

 24­89

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

24 WRIT PETITION NO.7873 OF 2019

AMBADAS MANIKRAO SAUDAGAR 

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS

     …

Mr. Mahesh P. Kale, Advocate for the Petitioner. 

Mr. S. G. Karlekar, AGP for Respondents­State.

WITH

89 WRIT PETITION NO.7963 OF 2019

MAROTI LAXMANRAO KARHALE 

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS

     …

Mr. Mahesh P. Kale, Advocate for the Petitioner. 

Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondents­State.

  CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &

                             MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

     DATED : 1st JULY, 2019. 

PER COURT:­ 

1.

The vehicles of the petitioners in these

writ   petitions   are   seized.     The   petitioners   had

moved before the J.M.F.C..  The J.M.F.C. has passed

an   order   directing   the   release   of   vehicles   on

certain terms and conditions.  The Tahasildar also

has   powers   to   seize   the   vehicle   under   Section

(2) 

 24­89

48(7) and (8) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.

The said powers are also exercised by the Revenue

Authority.

2.

We   have   heard   learned   counsel   for   the

petitioners and learned A.G.P.

3.

It   appears   that   the   vehicles   of

petitioners are seized for illegal excavation and

transportation of the sand.   As far as imposition

of   penalty   and   the   amount   is   concerned,   the

petitioners have remedy of Appeal.  The petitioners

may   avail   the   remedy   of   Appeal.     The   present

petitions are only to the extent of seizure of the

vehicles   and   for   the   prayers   for   release   of   the

vehicles.

4.

Considering that vehicles would be lying

idle and it will not be in anybodies interest to

keep the vehicles idle, we would allow the release

of the vehicles on following conditions:

(i)

The   petitioners   in   each   of   these

petitions   shall   deposit   an   amount   of

Rs.1,00,000/­ for release of vehicles.

5.

Upon deposit of this amount, the Authority

shall   release   the   vehicles   after   identifying   its

legitimate owner, after verifying the documents and

on petitioners' submitting the bond, so also after

complying with all terms and conditions put forth

(3) 

 24­89

by   the   J.M.F.C.   while   directing   release   of

vehicles.  

6.

The   deposit   of   Rs.1,00,000/­   each   with

Revenue Authority by petitioners would be without

prejudice to the rights and contentions of either

parties.

7.

Writ Petitions are disposed of.  No costs.

  (MANGESH S. PATIL)             (S. V. GANGAPURWALA) 

  JUDGE

          JUDGE

Devendra/July­19

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top