Tejendrasinh Sukhdevsinh ... vs State Of Gujarat & 2

Heard Mr. H. N. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Tirthraj Pandya, learned AGP for the respondent authorities.

2. The controversy in the petition as well as the prayer is limited. It is the case of the petitioner that the vehicle owned by him being Vehicle Hitachi, Ex-100*5110-10014 came to be seized by the respondent mining authorities on the ground of alleged breaches of Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage)(Amendment) Rules, 2005.

3. While proceedings against the petitioner for alleged breaches have to go on in accordance with law and the same is also not subject matter of present petition, the only prayer made is for release of the vehicle in question seized by the respondent mining authorities.

4. In this regard, Rule 18 of the Rules empowers the Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Tue May 03 03:20:21 IST 2016 C/SCA/7191/2016 ORDER competent authority to release the vehicle on compliance of conditions provided for in the Rule. It appears from the record that the petitioner has already made an application in writing to the competent authority on 26.04.2016, wherein readiness is shown to comply conditions including furnishing of bond in Form-L.

5. In aforesaid view of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no.2 competent authority to consider the question of release of the vehicle of the petitioner being Vehicle Hitachi, Ex- 100*5110-10014 in accordance with law within 5 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Direct service is permitted.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J.) chandrashekhar Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Tue May 03 03:20:21 IST 2016