Pankaj C. Mehta And Anr. vs. State Of Maharashtra And Ors.

Held

The Court allowed both writ petitions. It held that the actions of the revenue authorities were arbitrary, lacked statutory mandate, and exceeded their authority. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's pronouncement in *Jayeshbhai Kanjibhai Kalathia* which clarified that the MMDR Act does not grant power to make rules for regulating the transportation of legally excavated minerals. The State cannot restrict the movement of legally excavated sand within India. The Court also noted that in the case of *Dipak Logistics*, it was held that there is no prohibition for the transportation of ready-mix plast. The respondents failed to provide any statutory or regulatory basis for seizing ready-mix plast or to demonstrate that the transported material was not ready-mix plast but sand. Consequently, the penalty orders were quashed and set aside. In WP 11840/2016, the petitioner was directed to be refunded 25% of the penalty amount deposited.

Facts

These writ petitions challenged the seizure of vehicles carrying ready-mix plast and the imposition of penalties by revenue authorities under Section 48(8) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. In WP 11840/2016, a truck carrying ready-mix plast from Gujarat to Navi Mumbai was intercepted, and the Tahsildar levied a penalty of Rs. 2,49,500/- for alleged unauthorized transportation of sand. In WP 1233/2016, a similar seizure occurred, and a penalty of Rs. 2,86,925/- was levied on the truck owner for allegedly transporting illegally excavated sand. The petitioners asserted that ready-mix plast is a distinct finished product and that the transportation of lawfully excavated sand from Gujarat to Maharashtra cannot be regulated by Maharashtra authorities. Interim orders were passed directing the release of vehicles upon deposit of a portion of the penalty.

Key Issues

1. Whether the seizure of vehicles and imposition of penalties by Maharashtra revenue authorities for transporting ready-mix plast, which primarily contains sand lawfully excavated in Gujarat, is legally sustainable, particularly in light of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act) and constitutional provisions regarding inter-state trade? Petitioner's arguments: The revenue authorities acted arbitrarily and without legal authority. Ready-mix plast is a distinct finished product, and its transportation is not prohibited. Furthermore, the transportation of sand lawfully excavated in Gujarat cannot be subjected to regulation or penalty in Maharashtra. Reliance was placed on the Bombay High Court's judgment in *Dipak Logistics and Forwarders vs. The State of Maharashtra* and the Supreme Court's decision in *Jayeshbhai Kanjibhai Kalathia vs. State of Gujarat*. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments presented by the respondents in defense of their actions.