Uttarakhand High Court
Kumaon Stone Crusher vs State Of U.P. And on 9 July, 2012
Author: V.K. Bist
Bench: V.K. Bist
WPMS No. 1398/2012 Hon'ble V.K. Bist, J.
Mr. C.K. Sharma, holding brief of Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. H.M. Bhatia, Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 3.
Heard.
Learned counsel for the State prays for and is granted six weeks time to file counter affidavit. Two weeks time thereafter, is allowed to file rejoinder affidavit.
List after six weeks, alongwith WPMS No. 1088 of 2012.
CLMA No. 6794/12 (Interim Relief Application) Also heard on stay application. By way of instant petition, the petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 1 to 3 to not to impose and collect transit fee on the transit/transportation of Bajri, Boulder and natural sand by the petitioner from its authorized point to elsewhere on which transit fee at the prescribed rate have already been paid at the time to purchase at the point of purchase.
According to the petitioner, the respondents are not allowing the petitioner to transport/transit the riverbed material without payment of transit fee from the storage point for the second time in respect of same material for which transit fee has already been paid at the point of purchase from Nandhaur River.
Learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to the Division Bench judgment of this court dated 01.07.2004 passed in Writ Petition No. 1124 (M/B) of 2001 'M/s Kumaon Stone Crusher vs. State of U.P. and others' wherein this Court has held that transit fee cannot be realized twice.
Learned Brief Holder for the State has submitted that the State of Uttarakhand has preferred Special Leave Petition against the aforesaid Division Bench judgment of this court.
There appears no interim order of Hon'ble the Apex Court in this matter and the S.L.P. is pending. Since the order passed by the Division Bench of this court has not been set- aside or stayed as yet, therefore, prima-facie in view of the Division Bench judgment dated 01.07.2004 of this Court, the respondents are restrained from realizing the transit fee twice, on which the petitioner had already paid the transit fee. If the boulders are lifted from forest area, they may charge the transit fee.
Interim relief application stands disposed of.
(V.K. Bist, J.) 09.07.2012 NCM: