Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1746 (GUJ)

Jaydeepsinh Dolatsinh Dharia v. State of Gujarat

2017-10-10

R.SUBHASH REDDY, VIPUL M.PANCHOLI

body2017
ORDER : R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. 1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is filed by the original petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 91 of 2016, aggrieved by the order dated 13.7.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge. 2. The aforesaid Special Civil Application was filed with the prayers, which read as under: “(A). YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit this Special Civil Application; (B). YOUR LORDSHIPS may further be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, Order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned Order No. G.C.U/5372 dated 23.12.2015 passed by the respondent no. 2(ANNEXURE “J”) holding the same to be ex-facie illegal, arbitrary, perverse, violative of principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. (C). Pending admission, Hearing and Final disposal of this petition YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the execution, operation and implementation of the impugned Order No. G.C.U/5372 dated 23.12.2015 (ANNEXURE “J”) passed by the respondent no. 2 to meet with the ends of justice; (D). To pass such other and further orders necessary in the interest of justice.” 3. The subject matter of challenge in the petition was the order dated 23.12.2015 passed by the respondent No. 2, demanding an amount of Rs. 26,73,693/- for the alleged unauthorised excavation of mineral, as such, he is liable to pay penalty imposed under the provisions of Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 20 05. The learned Single Judge, without going into the merits of the matter, mainly on the ground that, there is an effective alternative remedy available to the appellant by way of appeal under the rules, rejected the petition. 4. When this matter has come up on earlier occasion, this Court vide order dated 19.09.2017 permitted the appellant to deposit 50% of the demanded amount, which is imposed by way of penalty. It is stated that the appellant has deposited an amount of Rs. 13,50,000/-, as per the order dated 19.9.2017 5. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant that the remedy of appeal is available before the Additional Director (Appeals) under Rule 11 of the aforesaid Rules. It is stated that the appellant has deposited an amount of Rs. 13,50,000/-, as per the order dated 19.9.2017 5. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant that the remedy of appeal is available before the Additional Director (Appeals) under Rule 11 of the aforesaid Rules. As much as 50% of the demanded amount is already deposited by the appellant, in view of the remedy of appeal available to the appellant, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this appeal, permitting the appellant herein to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority i.e Additional Director (Appeals), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. If any such appeal is preferred, the appellate authority is directed to receive the appeal, without reference to the limitation period of 30 days prescribed under Rule 11 of the Rules and consider such appeal on its own merits. In view of the deposit of more than 50% of the demanded amount, the impugned order dated 23.12.2015 passed by the respondent No. 2 in the petition shall not be enforced till final disposal of the appeal. It is made clear that the amount of Rs. 13,50,000/- deposited by the appellant and the bank guarantee, if any, given by the appellant during the pendency of the proceedings, would be subject to final order that may be passed by the appellate authority and the appellate authority is requested to dispose of the appeal within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of appeal, by/affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of. Consequently, Civil Application also stands disposed of. Direct service is permitted.