Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(2) 33.wp.219.2022.wp.220.2022 & wp.221.2022(common ord)

3. The vehicle of the petitioner bearing No. MH-40/BL-1806, was seized on 03.12.2021 by the Tahsildar, Mohadi, District Bhandara, as it was found to be carrying sand without a legal transit pass. The seizure was under Section 48 (7) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter referred as "the MLR Code") in pursuance to which, the Tahsildar Mohadi, imposed a penalty of Rs.90,500/- upon the respondent no.1, by his order dated 13.12.2021, for illegal transportation of sand, which obviously was in exercise of the powers as conferred upon him under Section 48 (7) of the MLR Code.

6. Mr. Ukey, learned APP for the petitioner/State by relying upon the language of Section 48(8)(1)(2) of the MLR Code, in juxtaposition to the language of Section 457 of the Cr. P.C., submits that when the seizure is under Section 48(8)(1) of the MLR Code, the provisions of Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. would not be attracted. He submits, that the provisions of Section 48(8)(1) of MLR Code specifically confer a power upon the Collector or any revenue Officer authorized by the Collector to seize or confiscate any mineral as well as the vehicle used for transporting the same and the power to release such vehicle is with the Collector or any other Officer not below the rank of Deputy Collector authorized by the Collector in this behalf. It is therefore submitted, that when a specific power is conferred upon a specific authority under the MLR Code for the purpose of release of the vehicle which is seized, the provisions of Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. would not be attracted and the impugned order and judgment, which do not consider this position of law, cannot be sustained.

8. The essential facts are not disputed, that the Tahsildar acting under the powers under Section 48(8) (1) of the MLR Code has seized the vehicle on 03.12.2021 and by his order dated 13.12.2021 has imposed the penalty for illegal transportation of sand, which power is traced to Section 48(7) of the MLR Code. It is also not in dispute that the seizure of the said vehicle is under Section 48(8)(1) of the MLR Code, which is the position acceded to by Mr. Gawali, learned counsel for the respondent no.1. This being the position, in my considered opinion, since there is a specific power conferred by virtue of Section 48(8)(2) of the MLR Code upon the Collector or such other Officer not below the (5) 33.wp.219.2022.wp.220.2022 & wp.221.2022(common ord) rank of Deputy Collector to release the seized vehicle/machinery/equipment, it is only the person or the authority empowered under the statute which in this case, is the Collector or the Officer authorized by him, not below the rank of Deputy Collector, who would have the power or jurisdiction to entertain an application for release of the seized vehicle and no other authority.

10. As the seizure is by the Tahsildar under the provisions of Section 48(8)(1) of the MLR Code and a specific provision has been made in Section 48(8)(2), empowering the Collector or any Officer not below the rank of Deputy Collector as authorized by him, to entertain an application for release of the vehicle, it is only the Collector or the Deputy Collector as authorized by him, who would be empowered to entertain an application for release of the vehicle upon such terms, as are specified in Section 48(8)(2) of the MLR Code and not otherwise, for the reason that a special provision has been enacted by the State legislature, in respect of illegal transportation of sand and other minerals, by virtue of Section 48 of the MLR Code as amended from time to time in this regard. Thus, when a specific provision is created/enacted for the purpose illegal seizure of sand and other minor minerals and the confiscation, seizure and release of the vehicles transporting such minerals, then only the authority empowered under the Act shall have the jurisdiction to entertain an application for release of the said vehicle and none else.