Bombay High Court
M/S. Seven Eleven Constructions Pvt. ... vs The Addl. Tahsildar And Executive ... on 5 November, 2020
Author: N.R.Borkar
Bench: K.K.Tated, N.R.Borkar
19.95032.20-wpst.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Basavraj CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION
G. Patil WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.95032/2020
Digitally signed by
Basavraj G. Patil
Date: 2020.11.07
12:07:29 +0530 Seven Eleven Constructions Pvt. Ltd. ..... Petitioner
Vs.
Addl. Tahasildar & Executive
Magistrate & Ors. ..... Respondents
Mr. Girish Godbole a/w. Mr. Aditya P. Shirke and Ms.
Deepashikha G. Godbole for the Petitioner
Mrs. P. G. Gavhane, AGP for the State
CORAM: K.K.TATED &
N.R.BORKAR,JJ.
DATED : NOVEMBER 5, 2020 P.C. 1 Heard. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner challenges the order dated 16.10.2020 passed by the learned Tahasildar, Mira Bhayander, under section 48(7) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 calling upon the Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.17,87,62,800/- for illegally filling of ordinary earth, brass, stones, minerals.
2 The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that initially, the Tahasildar had issued notice dated 06.11.2015 in respect of the same cause of action i.e. filling of 1484 brass minerals. He submits that the Respondent had issued the said notice but failed to take any action. Same was Basavraj G. Patil 1/3 19.95032.20-wpst.odt dropped by them. He submits that thereafter the Tahasildar, without giving any notice to the Petitioner, passed order dated 30.09.2016 imposing the penalty in the sum of Rs.79,37,80,000/-. He submits that in the said order, it is stated that they had issued notice dated 22.08.2016. He submits that the said notice was never served on the Petitioner. Hence, the Petitioner had challenged the said order before the Sub Divisional Officer under section 247 of the MLRC . He submits that the Sub Divisional Officer vide his order dated 04.10.2017 set aside the order dated 30.09.2016 passed by the learned Tahasildar and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing. He submits that they had raised a specific objection before the Sub Divisional officer about the non service of any show cause notice dated 22.08.2016. He submits that thereafter the Petitioner has placed on record the fact of the case by letter dated 05.10.2020. He submits that without considering the letter dated 05.10.2020 and without hearing the Petitioner, the Tahasildar has passed the impugned order dated 16.10.2020 calling upon them to pay sum of Rs.17,87,62,800/-. He submits that, the Petitioners are challenging the action of the Respondents on several grounds as stated in the memo of the Writ Petition.
3 It is the case of the Petitioner that the Tahasildar, without issuing any show cause notice, passed the said order. Hence, the same is liable to be dismissed.
4 On the other hand, the learned AGP seeks some time to take instructions and file Affidavit-in-Reply.
Basavraj G. Patil 2/319.95032.20-wpst.odt 5 Hence, the following order is passed:
a. The Respondent State to file Affidavit-in-Reply on or before 05.12.2020 with copy to other side.
b. Rejoinder, if any, shall be filed on or before 11.12.2020 with copy to other side.
c. In the meanwhile, the operation and implementation of the order dated 16.10.2020 passed by the Tahasildar, Mira Bhyander Road, Mumbai vide order No.mahasul/goakh/SR/02/2020, is stayed.
d. S.O. to 18.12.2020.
(N.R.BORKAR, J.) (K.K.TATED, J.)
Basavraj G. Patil 3/3