HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11044 / 2017

Madanlal Son of Shri Kaluram Meghwal, Aged About 41 Years, By

Caste Meghwal, Resident of Keru, District- Jodhpur.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Rajasthan Through the Principal Secretary, Mines

Department, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Mines & Geology Department, Directorate, Khanij

Bhawan, Udaipur.

3. The Mining Engineer, Mines & Geology Department, Jodhpur.

4. The Assistant Mining Engineer (Recovery), Mines & Geology

Department, Jodhpur.

5. The Manager, UCO Bank, Branch Keru, District- Jodhpur.

----Respondents

_____________________________________________________

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.L. Chauhan

For Respondent(s) : Ms. R.R. Kanwar

_____________________________________________________

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR

Order

16/02/2018

The prayer in the present petition is for quashing of the

demand order dated 02/02/2016 as well as consequences of the

amount as having been deposited in pursuance to the said

demand notice with a further direction that the petitioner’s saving

bank account be released and he should be allowed to operate his

saving bank account.

While praying for setting aside the said order, it was inter-

alia contended that the notice of demand was never received by

the petitioner and, therefore, the impugned demand order has

(2 of 3)

[CW-11044/2017]

been issued without following the due principle of natural justice.

Reply has been filed. Para No.3 of the reply reads as under :-

“Accordingly, a show cause notice dated 29.5.2008

was issued to the petitioner by the Mining Engineer,

Jodhpur. Not only that, but criminal case was also filed

in the court of the Judicial Magistrate. Thereafter, in

pursuance of an audit-objection, recovery proceedings

were initiated and by a notice dated 2.6.2015,

petitioner was asked to deposit Rs. 91,080/- as cost of

mineral excavated + penalty. The said show-cause

notice was sent through ordinary post and it did not

return back. However, when the petitioner failed to

deposit the dues, proceedings under the Rajasthan

Land Revenue Act were initiated against him. On

27.08.2015, a notice was issued to the petitioner by

the M.E., Jodhpur. However, neither the petitioner

appeared before the Mining Engineer, nor submitted

any reply to the show-cause notice. It is thus,

apparent that the petitioner was provided adequate

opportunity of being heard, but he chose not to avail

the same and waived the same”.

It is evident from the above that there was no

evidence/proof of the notices having been ever received by the

petitioner. Admittedly, even the alleged notice was sent by

ordinary post.

In view of the above, this Court is satisfied that the action of

the respondents in freezing the account of the petitioner without

(3 of 3)

[CW-11044/2017]

granting him opportunity of being heard is arbitrary and unfair.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned demand order

dated 02/02/2016 is set aside. The respondents are directed to

allow the petitioner to operate his saving bank account with liberty

to proceed afresh, in accordance with law by granting due

opportunity to the petitioner and following the principles of natural

justice.

(NIRMALJIT KAUR),J.

Sanjaysolanki,pa