ORDER : Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to release the petitioner's Auto bearing Registration No. TN 57-BZ-6613-PIAGGIO-MAKE which was seized by the 3rd respondent on 21.05.2019. 1. In all these Writ Petitions, the prayer sought for is to release the vehicles in question of the respective petitioners, which have been seized by the respondent/Revenue Officials for the alleged transportation of illicit sand. 2. The learned respective counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that, the petitioners have not committed any crime and the seizure made by the respondents on the pretext of transportation of illicit sand is factually incorrect. However, at any rate, the issue can be agitated and be decided before the appropriate forum. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that, insofar as the present issue raised in these Writ petitions is concerned, the vehicles in question, which have been seized by the respondents, have been kept in idle in the open sky and if it is continued to be in open sky for several days or month, the value of the vehicles get diminished or depreciated; as they are motor vehicles, if they have been kept idle without being plied, their spare parts also would get rusted and ultimately the vehicles may not be in a position to use and therefore, in order to save the value of the vehicles, if these vehicles are released or directed to be released on any condition to be imposed by this Court, the petitioners are ready to abide by the same. In this regard, the learned respective counsel appearing for the petitioners have produced a copy of the order passed by a learned Judge of this Court recently and would further submit that, similar orders have been passed in number of petitions, where a conditional order of direction to release the vehicle has been passed by this Court. 4. In this regard, the learned respective counsel appearing for the petitioners have produced a copy of the order passed by a learned Judge of this Court recently and would further submit that, similar orders have been passed in number of petitions, where a conditional order of direction to release the vehicle has been passed by this Court. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that, though it was claimed by these petitioners that, these vehicles have been seized on the pretext of alleged transportation of illicit sand, the fact remains that, those vehicles have been involved in such illegal transportation of sand and therefore, the authorities i.e. the respondents herein, are empowered to seize the vehicles and file a private complaint before the Special Court constituted in this regard under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 5. The learned Special Government Pleader also would submit that, under Section 30-B of the Act, a Special Court can be constituted, which can take cognizance of the offence punishable under the Act and Rules made thereunder. In this context, the learned Special Government Pleader Produced a copy of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court made in a batch of writ petitions of similar nature in W.P. (MD) Nos. 19936 of 2017 etc. batch in the matter of Muthu vs. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District and Others, dated 29.10.2018 and also the subsequent clarificatory order passed by the same Division Bench in a batch of cases in W.P. (MD) Nos. 22023 to 22026 of 2018, dated 11.01.2019. 6. I have perused the said Division Bench order as well as the clarificatory order referred to above. 7. In the Division Bench order, dated 29.10.2018, i.e. Muthu vs. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District cited above, the Division Bench of this Court, after having taken note of the fact that, even though Section 30-B of the Act specifies constitution of the Special Court to take cognizance of the offence and to decide the same, such a constitution of a Special Court have not been effected by the State Government and in this context, the Division Bench has given a detail findings. 8. 8. After having given its finding, a direction has been given to the State Government to constitute Special Court under Section 30-B of the Act within a period of two months and once such Special Court is constituted, the revenue authorities, who seized the vehicles for the alleged offence under the Act and Rules, can file a private complaint before the Special Court constituted so, where if at all any vehicle seized that can also be produced before the Special Court and wherever such vehicles are produced for return of properties/vehicles, the aggrieved party can file an application before the Special Court and accordingly, on merits, the Special Court can decide the application for return of properties/vehicles. 9. To understand the said issue, the set of direction given by the Division Bench in the judgment dated 29.10.2018, is hereby extracted: “13. As recorded earlier, illegal mining is carrying on unabatedly under the very nose of the revenue officials, which can be taken judicial note of by this Court with a fond hope that the same can be controlled in future. Hence, we issue the following directions: (i) The District Level Task Forces and Taluk Level Task Forces, constituted pursuant to the order passed in WP (MD) No. 9806 of 2018 should follow the G.O. (Ms) No. 135 Industries (MMA.1) Department, dated 13.11.2009 in letter and spirit. (ii) As stated in the above said Government Order, periodical meetings will have to be held which is inclusive of action taken/to be taken for the illicit mining. (iii) Steps will have to be taken for dereliction of the duty by the concerned officials. (iv) Taluk Level Task Forces shall also comply with the directions issued in the Government Order by making frequent surprise checks and submit their report to the District Level Task Forces. (v) The Taluk Level Task Forces shall meet every fortnight as mandated in the Government Order. (vi) The responsibility fixed in the Government Order will have to be strictly construed and action will have to be taken against the erring Village Administrative Officer, Tahsildar, Officer in-charge of Department of Geology and Mining at District Level. (vii) Action taken report will have to be sent by the District Collector concerned for the purpose of taking necessary action. The District Collector concerned shall take appropriate departmental action by himself as per the Rules provided so. (vii) Action taken report will have to be sent by the District Collector concerned for the purpose of taking necessary action. The District Collector concerned shall take appropriate departmental action by himself as per the Rules provided so. (viii) Separate records will have to be maintained by the Village Administrative Officer, Tahsildar and Officer in-charge of the Department of Geology and Mining with respect to the cases involving illicit mining. (ix) As and when illicit mining is reported, the same will be recorded in the records. (x) The respective District Collectors will have to ensure by making vide publicity of phone particulars assigned to the District Level Task Forces and the Talk Level Task Forces, so that, the general public can give their complaints. There should be affixture or display of the phone particulars in the Collectorate, Taluk office, Office of Deputy Director and Assistant Director of Geology and Mining and that of the Village Administrative Officer. (xi) Complainant will have to be intimated on the action taken within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the complaint. A complaint shall also be received even when made through phone calls. (xii) Complaints by an authorised person under Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 are to be made immediately and not later than one week from the date of seizure. (xiii) Whenever, a final report is filed for the offence under Section 379 IPC by the jurisdictional police before the jurisdictional Magistrate, the same shall also be committed to the Special Court. This is for the reason that it would be appropriate to deal with both the police case and the private complaint by the same Court and in order to avoid any possible conflict. (xiv) The revenue officials at the time of seizure can issue a memo to the person in-charge of the vehicle, mineral among other things, indicating the seizure made, along with the date and time. (xv) In so far as the seized vehicles are concerned, they shall be produced before the concerned Magistrate Court by the revenue authorities at the time of filing their respective complaints. (xvi) Any application for release of vehicle etc., can only be filed before the Special Court alone. (xv) In so far as the seized vehicles are concerned, they shall be produced before the concerned Magistrate Court by the revenue authorities at the time of filing their respective complaints. (xvi) Any application for release of vehicle etc., can only be filed before the Special Court alone. (xvii) Any violation of the above would constitute a contempt of the order passed by this Court, for which, appropriate application can either be filed before the First Bench of this Court or any other Bench as per the direction of the Hon'ble Chief Justice. 14. With the above observations and directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.” 10. By virtue of the said Division Bench judgment dated 29.10.2018, especially, the direction No. (xvi) any application to release the vehicle under the Act can only be made before the Special Court to be constituted in this regard and therefore, subsequent to the said Division Bench judgment, when Writ Petitions were filed before this Court, the same seem to have been returned by the Registry of this Court by citing the said order of the Division Bench. Subsequently, the issue has been brought before this Court before the same Division Bench by making a complaint that, though a direction was given by the Division Bench, on 29.10.2018, to constitute a Special Court within a period of two months, no such Special Court so far has been constituted by the State Government, with the result, applications to release the vehicles could not be filed before the Special Court and if at all any application is filed, in one or two cases before the concerned Magistrate Court, the same has been rejected by the concerned Magistrate Court for want of jurisdiction and therefore, only in that circumstances, those persons, who seek remedy of release of vehicles, which are seized by the Revenue Officials under the Act and Rules made thereunder, had no option except to approach this Court once again by filing writ petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, another set of Writ Petitions in W.P. (MD) Nos. 22023 of 2018 etc. Accordingly, another set of Writ Petitions in W.P. (MD) Nos. 22023 of 2018 etc. batch came to be decided by the same Division Bench by order dated 11.01.2019, where, after noticing the fact that, the State Government, despite the direction given by the Division Bench, has not constituted the Special Court under Section 30-B of the Act, has given the following clarificatory order: “A clarification has been sought for in the order passed by us on the premise that Special Courts, as contemplated under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 have not been constituted so far. Therefore, there will be difficulty in getting orders for the release of the vehicle. 2. We find considerable force in the submission made by the learned counsel at the bar. Factually, it appears that Special Courts are not constituted. Therefore, we direct the Registry to take up the issue with the State Government and see to it that Special Courts are constituted preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. In the meanwhile, Clause (xvi) para 13 of the order dated 29.10.2018 passed by us stands stayed. Resultantly, writ petitions can be filed before this Court seeking release of the vehicles as Special Courts are yet to be constituted. We make it clear that this is only an interim arrangement till the constitution of the Special Courts which will deal with it when the matter is taken up for hearing on the next occasion. However, the order passed by us with respect to making of the complaint is not disturbed and therefore, the aforesaid direction also stands clarified that such complaints will have to be filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate who shall keep them pending awaiting appropriate orders for the constitution of the Special Courts. As and when Special Courts are constituted, the Magistrates are directed to commit the cases as per law. We further make the position clear that after the constitution of Special Courts, if new complaints are filed, then, our earlier direction issued to the concerned Magistrates would stand. 3. In such view of the matter, Clause (xvi) of para 13 of the order dated 29.10.2018 also would get revived. Post the matter after two months for further orders to verify the above compliance of the constitution of the Special Courts. 3. In such view of the matter, Clause (xvi) of para 13 of the order dated 29.10.2018 also would get revived. Post the matter after two months for further orders to verify the above compliance of the constitution of the Special Courts. We further make it clear that this order will have an application to all the pending matters which only mean that the order passed earlier will not also have any bearing with respect to the orders passed by the learned single Judge already. In such of those cases, where the papers are returned by the Registry, the learned counsel for the petitioners are permitted to represent them and on such compliance, Registry shall number them, subject to other compliance and post the matter before appropriate Court. 4. One of the counsel made a submission that in some cases, Judicial Magistrates have already dismissed the applications filed as not maintainable in the light of the Division Bench order. We clarify that even in such cases, it is well open to the petitioners to approach this Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Even this observation is also subject to the constitution of the Special Courts. 5. Accordingly, the clarification petitions filed in W.P.M.P. (MD) Nos. 22639 and 22594 of 2018 shall stand disposed of. Post the Writ Petitions after two months.” 11. Therefore, in the clarificatory order, the Division Bench has stayed Clause “xvi” of the directives issued by the very same Division Bench by its order dated 29.10.2018 and permitted the parties to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the authorities to release the vehicles seized for the alleged illicit transportation of sand/mine. That is how, all these writ petitions have been filed before this Court seeking the aforesaid remedy respectively. 12. I have gone through a similar order passed by a learned Judge of this Court, where the learned Judge has passed some conditional order for release of vehicles, in similar circumstances, in the matter of Senthil vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tanjore and Others, made in W.P. (MD) No. 6179 of 2019, dated 15.03.2019 and the relevant portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: “3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record. If this submission turns out to be false, the order now passed by this Court would stand automatically recalled and the petitioner will be visited with serious consequences. I am of the view that no purpose will be served by keeping the vehicle in question in the custody of the respondents. If the vehicle is kept in open space and exposed to sun light and rain, it would lose its value. Therefore, the respondents are directed to release the said vehicle subject to the following conditions: (a) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust. He shall execute an affidavit of undertaking that, he shall not involve in any offence in future that may lead to the seizure of the vehicle in question. The petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle in question till the proceedings are completed. (b) The petitioner shall produce all the documents pertaining to the ownership of the seized vehicle. (c) This order for release of the vehicle can be pressed into service by the petitioner only if the vehicle is not in the custody of the criminal Court. If the vehicle is in the custody of concerned Criminal Court of appropriate jurisdiction, then, option is given to the petitioner to approach the concerned Judicial Magistrate to get release of the vehicle, by filing necessary application in the manner known to law. (d) As and when the respondents call for the vehicle for enquiry, the petitioner has to produce the vehicle in question and he shall cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents. 4. Upon completion of these formalities, the respondents shall release the vehicle forthwith without any delay. If this undertaking given by the petitioner is breached, the petitioner will not be entitled to interim release of the vehicle in future.” 13. With these factual and legal background, these Writ Petitions have been filed with the aforesaid prayer. Since these vehicles have been allegedly involved in illicit transportation of sand, according to the respondents, they have been seized. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners submitted that, they have not involved in any illicit transportation. 14. With these factual and legal background, these Writ Petitions have been filed with the aforesaid prayer. Since these vehicles have been allegedly involved in illicit transportation of sand, according to the respondents, they have been seized. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners submitted that, they have not involved in any illicit transportation. 14. Be that as it may, the said issue has to be decided only by the competent criminal Court by way of a Special Court. Though a directive by way of time bound order has been given by a Division Bench of this Court as early as on 29.10.2018, to constitute a Special Court, so far, no such Special Court has been constituted. 15. The learned Special Government Pleader would submit that, the Government is taking all steps to constitute a special Court and shortly they will do it. 16. Constitution of a Special Court is initially by issuing a notification, whereby any existing regular Court can be designated as a Special Court for the purpose of specific type of offences under a Special Act. Even for issuance of such notification for constitution of a Special Court as directed by this Court, by order dated 29.10.2018, in the Division Bench judgment referred to above, the Government cannot take such a long time. In fact, by a clarificatory order, dated 11.01.2019, the Division Bench once again reiterated the early constitution of such special Court and in fact, directed to list all these cases after two months “for reporting compliance” by the Government. 17. Despite these directives issued by the Division Bench, no progress seems to have been made by the respondent Government and this inaction on the part of the Government cannot be appreciated by this Court. 18. Since the natural resources are being looted by unscrupulous persons and antisocial elements in the State, only in order to prevent such menace and crime against society in future, these kind of legislative measures are taken by the legislature, thereby, under the Act, provisions have been made under Section 30-B of the Act to constitute a Special Court. 19. As per the mandate of the legislation, Special Court ought to have been constituted on their own by the State Government, nevertheless, no such steps have been taken. 19. As per the mandate of the legislation, Special Court ought to have been constituted on their own by the State Government, nevertheless, no such steps have been taken. Therefore, taking judicial notice of that inaction on the part of the State, directions have been issued by the Division Bench of this Court in October 2018 giving only two months time to constitute a special Court. Subsequently, by a clarificatory order dated 11.01.2019, the said position once again been reiterated by the Division Bench. In fact, in the clarificatory order, the Division Bench has noted the fact that, unless the Special Court is constituted under Section 30-B of the Act, application to seek for releasing the vehicles cannot be entertained by the Special Court, with the result, writ petitions are pouring in before this Court seeking such remedy for release of vehicles. And being a routine affair, this Court is inclined to grant direction to the respective authorities to release the vehicles, of course, on condition of payment of some penalty/fine. 20. In order to avoid this situation only, as available in other cases under the criminal jurisprudence, any materials including vehicles, which are involved in any crime, can be sought for by way of return of property only before the concerned Court, where the case is taken up for cognizance and trial. Here, in the case in hand, only in order to have a similar format/system, a Special Court was sought to be constituted under Section 30-B of the Act and the same has been directed to be complied with by the orders of the Division Bench referred to above. Despite all these developments and the inconveniences being caused to every day activities, the State Government is very lethargic in moving the issue and even till date, the resultant position is that, no Special Court has been constituted. This Court does not accept such a lukewarm response from the State in complying with the direction given by this Court, that too, by taking into account the public interest. 21. This Court does not accept such a lukewarm response from the State in complying with the direction given by this Court, that too, by taking into account the public interest. 21. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that, while granting a similar order in the line of the orders granted by the respective learned Judges in number of petitions to release the vehicles on condition, once again reiterate and direct the State Government to come forward immediately for issuance of notifications to constitute a Special Court under Section 30-B of the Act in all the Districts or wherever necessary within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 22. If such Special Courts are not constituted within the stipulated time, such inaction shall be construed as a contempt of not only this order, but also the orders passed by the Division Bench in W.P. (MD) No. 19936 of 2017 etc. batch dated 29.10.2018 and the clarificatory order of the Division Bench made in W.P. (MD) No. 22023 to 22026 of 2018 etc., batch dated 11.01.2019 and appropriate action including suo-motu contempt will be initiated against all authorities concerned. 23. With the above observations and directions, the vehicles in question shall be released by the respective respondents on the following conditions: (a) The petitioners in W.P. (MD) Nos.12786, 12822, 12814, 12845, 12862, 12863 and 12870 of 2019 shall deposit a sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) respectively, to the concerned District Educational Officers of the respective Districts. (b) The petitioners in W.P. (MD) Nos. 12864 and 12865 shall deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) respectively, to the concerned District Educational Officers of the respective Districts. (c) The petitioner in W.P. (MD) No. 12871 of 2019 shall deposit a sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand only) to the concerned District Educational Officer of the concerned District. (d) The petitioner in W.P. (MD) No. 12857 of 2019 shall deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the concerned District Educational Officer of the concerned District. (e) Each petitioner shall execute an affidavit of undertaking that, they shall not involve in any offence in future that may lead to the seizure of the vehicles in question. The petitioners shall not alienate/encumber the vehicles in question till the proceedings are completed. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the concerned District Educational Officer of the concerned District. (e) Each petitioner shall execute an affidavit of undertaking that, they shall not involve in any offence in future that may lead to the seizure of the vehicles in question. The petitioners shall not alienate/encumber the vehicles in question till the proceedings are completed. (f) The petitioners shall produce all the documents pertaining to the ownership of the seized vehicles. (g) This order for release of the vehicles can be pressed into service by the petitioners only if the vehicles are not in the custody of the criminal Court. If the vehicles are in the custody of concerned Criminal Court of appropriate jurisdiction, then, option is given to the petitioners to approach the concerned Judicial Magistrate to get release of the vehicles, by filing necessary applications in the manner known to law. (h) As and when the respondents call for the vehicles for enquiry, the petitioners have to produce the vehicles in question and they shall cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents. (i) the amount so directed to be deposited shall be deposited before the concerned District Educational Officer by appropriate transactions/acknowledgement and such amount to be received by the concerned District Educational Officer of the respective Districts from the petitioners shall be utilized for development of infrastructures in Government Schools, wherever, it is necessary. 24. A copy of this order shall forthwith be sent to the Secretary to the Government, Department of Geology and Mining and also to the Director of Geology and Mining, Government of Tamil Nadu, for strict compliance of the orders of this Court with regard to the constitution of the Special Court as directed above. 25. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.