1. Petitioner challenges the locking of an online royalty pass account and subsequent order directing electricity disconnection due to alleged unauthorized mineral storage without following statutory procedural safeguards. (Para 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 35715
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Nisha M. Thakore, J
Chandera Devasibhai Samatbhai – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17993 of 2025
Important Points
The locking of an online ATR account must be preceded by the issuance of a show cause notice under Rule 5 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2017, to ensure adherence to due process.
Subject
Administrative Law - Mining Regulations
Act Referred
Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2017: R.5, R.18
Headnote
(A) Administrative Law - Due Process - Locking of ATR account - Issuance of a show cause notice after the locking of the ATR account is in violation of the procedure prescribed under Rule 5 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2017. (Para 6)
(B) Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - Relegation to Authority - Where an order is passed de-hors the rules, the petitioner must be afforded a reasonable and fair opportunity to offer an explanation to the show cause notice before a reasoned decision is made in accordance with law. (Para 7)
Issues: Whether the locking of the online ATR account prior to the issuance of a show cause notice under Rule 5 of the Rules of 2017 is legally sustainable.
(B) Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - Relegation to Authority - Where an order is passed de-hors the rules, the petitioner must be afforded a reasonable and fair opportunity to offer an explanation to the show cause notice before a reasoned decision is made in accordance with law. (Para 7)
Issues: Whether the locking of the online ATR account prior to the issuance of a show cause notice under Rule 5 of the Rules of 2017 is legally sustainable.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Namrata Harishbhai Chauhan
For the Respondents: Henil Shah
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Namrata Harishbhai Chauhan
For the Respondents: Henil Shah
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner argues violation of statutory procedures and principles of natural justice, while the State contends the order is valid and the petitioner should pursue alternative statutory remedies. (Para 5 )
3. The court observed that the authority locked the account in violation of procedural rules by failing to issue a notice before taking the coercive action. (Para 6 )
4. Administrative actions invoking regulatory penalties or account locking must strictly adhere to statutory notice procedures to satisfy the requirements of natural justice. (Para 6 , 7 )
5. The court directed the authorities to immediately unlock the account and relegated the matter to the authority for a fresh decision after providing the petitioner a fair hearing. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 )
6. Can an authority unilaterally lock an online mineral royalty pass account without prior notice?
No. The court held that locking an ATR account before issuing a show-cause notice violates Rule 5 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2017. (Para 6 )
7. What is the consequence of failing to provide a fair opportunity of hearing in administrative mineral storage proceedings?
If an order is passed without providing a reasonable and fair opportunity to respond to show-cause allegations, the authority must re-examine the matter after complying with proper procedural due process. (Para 7 )
8. Does the pendency of a statutory remedy preclude a petitioner from seeking relief against arbitrary administrative action?
While alternative remedies exist, the court may entertain a petition if the respondent authority's action is found to be de-hors the governing statutory rules and in violation of established judicial precedent. (Para 5 , 6 )
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Ms. Namrata H. Chauhan, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Henil Shah, learned AGP for the respondents – State.
2. Considering the limited issue involved, with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken-up for final disposal at admission stage.
3. By way of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
“A. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of/or in the nature of mandamus or certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction:
B. To the respondent no.2 to reopen the online ATR account having bearing number STQL3101000215 for issuance of Royalty Pass in respect of stock registration fo Black Tranp situated at of government land within Survey no.98 paiki 22 of Mouje : Gundran, Taluka: Talala & District : Gir Somnath pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to immediately open the online virtual account bearing number STQL3101000215 for issuance of Royalty Pass in respect of stock registration of black trap situated at of government land within Survey Survey no.98 paiki 22 of Mouje : Gundran, Taluka: Talala & District : Gir Somnath. Ex-parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer B above may be granted;
B. Such other and/or further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
C. To issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 3rd February, 2026 (Annexure-E) issued by the respondent no.2 and the consequential order no.GJ/Ge.Dho./Sangrah/Vasulat- Hukam/2026-27/6424 dated 21st April, 2026 (Annexure-G) passed by the respondent no.3; and be further pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the concerned respondent authorities, including PGVCL Talala, Gir Somnath, not to disconnect the electricity connection of the petitioner, and if the same has already been disconnected, to restore it forthwith.”
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner is engaged in the business of storage and selling of blacktrap minerals pursuant to permit for stock registration dated 31st July, 2015 in respect of Government land of Village Gundran , Taluka Talala, District : Gir Somnath.
4.1 It is submitted that while the challenge to the illegal locking of the ATR account was sub-judice before this Hon'ble Court, and this Hon'ble Court was pleased to issue notice on 6th January, 2026 making it returnable on 19th February, 2026, yet the respondent no.2 issued a Show Cause Notice dated 3rd February, 2026, which was received by the petitioner on 6th February, 2026. In notice dated 3rd February, 2026, it was alleged unauthorized storage of Blacktrap mineral and proposing a penalty of Rs.6,37,282/- and Next date of hearing was given on 16th February, 2026. The petitioner submits that, the Collector, Geology and Mining Department, Gir- Somnath, in utter disregard of the pending proceedings before this Hon'ble Court and without considering the submissions made by the petitioner, proceeded to pass a final order bearing Ref. No. GJ/Ge.Dho./Sangrah/Vasulat- Hukam/2026-27 dated 21st April, 2026, thereby con demand of Rs.6,37,282/- and further directing the Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd., (PGVCL), Talala to disconnect the electricity connection of the applicant.
4.2 She has therefore submitted that no reasonable and fair opportunity of hearing is given to petitioner. She has further submitted that the action of authority is required to be quashed as without following due procedure under Rule 5 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2017 [“Rules of 2017” for short], the ATR account of the petitioner has been locked. She, has therefore, submit
