Sr.No.113

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CRR-3442-2019

Date of decision:19.12.2019

Amit

... Petitioner(s)

versus

State of Haryana

... Respondent (s)

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

Present:

Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J.(Oral)

Present petition has been filed against order dated 08.11.2019

passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Palwal whereby the

application filed by the petitioner for releasing the vehicle Tractor on

Superdari has been rejected.

The brief facts of the case which can been seen from the file

would be that vide Annexure P-1, the vehicle belonging to the petitioner

was seized under Sub-rule 104 of The Haryana Minor Mineral Concession,

Stocking, Transportation of Minerals and Prevention of Illegal Mining

Rules, 2012 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Rules'). Learned counsel for the

petitioner thereafter, moved an application before the learned Illaqa

Magistrate, Palwal (Annexure P-5) for releasing the vehicle Tractor on

Superdari to the petitioner who is stated to be the owner of the vehicle.

Learned Illaqa Magistrate, Palwal vide impugned order has dismissed the

application on the ground that as per Rule 104 of the Rules; the

consequences of illegal or un-authorised mining have been specifically

provided the provisions of Rules 104 which is reproduced as under:-

SHIVANI

2019.12.20 17:13

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Chandigarh

CRR-3442-2019

-2-

“104. Consequences of illegal or unauthorised

mining---Any act of illegal or unauthorised mining

shall be liable to the following:

(i)

for a first time violation, the said mineral

shall be liable to be seized along with the

impounding of all such tools, equipment,

vehicles or any other things used for such

unauthorised operation, which may be released

only upon realisation of the payment of price of

the minernal and the applicable royalty for the

mineral extracted and, in addition, a fine which

shall not be less than Ten Thousand rupees;

(ii)

for a second time violation, the said

mineral shall be liable to be seized along with the

impounding of all such tools, equipment,

vehicles or any other things used for such

unauthorised operation for a minimum period of

seven days, which may released only upon

realisation of the payment of price of the mineral

and the applicable royalty for the mineral

extracted and, in addition, a fine which shall not

be less than fifteen thousand rupees;

(iii)

wherever a person is found to the

indulging in such offence for the third time or

more, the officer concerned shall register an FIR

SHIVANI

2019.12.20 17:13

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

Chandigarh

CRR-3442-2019

-3-

and handover all such tools, equipment, vehicles

or any other things used for such unauthorised

operation to the Police. Any such offence shlal

entail (a) confiscation of all such tools,

equipment, vehicles or any other thing used for

such unauthorised operation for a period of

minimum thirty days or more, and (b) pecuniary

penalty and punishment for the offence as

provided under Section 21 of the Mines &

Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act,

1957.”

Learned Illaqa Magistrate, Palwal has further observed that

against the action taken by the Mining Officer (Officer Incharge), an appeal

lies to the Director under Rule 109 of the Rules is reproduced as under:-

“109. Appeals:- (1) Unless otherwise provided,

an appeal against an order passed by the Officer-

in-Charge [District Level Environmental

Committee] shall lie with the Director;

(2) An appeal against the order passed by the

Director shall lie before the Administrative

Secretary of the Department;

(3) No order under these rules shall be passed

by the competent authority against any person

unless he has been issued a show cause and