Allowed

Basudev Matoliram Agrawal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC13 Apr 2022WP/2318/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order imposing levy on HT vehicle due to 24 hours' notice from the Tahsildar without compliance of principles of natural justice. The High Court quashed the order, remanded the matter for reconsideration after proper service of show cause notice, and directed release of vehicle upon deposit of sum.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the impugned order; remanded matter for proper service of show cause notice; directed release of vehicle upon deposit of Rs.1,00,000/-.

Basudev Matoliram Agrawal Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

921 WRIT PETITION NO.2318 OF 2022

¶3

BASUDEV MATOLIRAM AGRAWAL

¶4

VERSUS

¶5

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶6

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S. K. Mathpati
AGP for Respondents 1 to 5 : Mr. A.S. Shinde

¶7

CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA &
 S.G. MEHARE, JJ.
DATED : 13/04/2022.

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of

¶10

India, the petitioner seeks to direct the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to
release vehicle No. MH-22/AA-0290 owned by the petitioner and for
quashing of show cause notice dated 12.2.2021 and the impugned
order dated 8.11.2021 by issuing writ of certiorari.

¶11

2.The learned counsel for petitioner invited our attention to
the impugned order annexed at page No. 46 of the writ petition and
submits that no show cause notice was served upon the petitioner by
the Sub Divisional Officer before passing the impugned order and by
imposing penalty of Rs.2,88,341/-.

¶12

3.Perusal of the said order indicates that the Tahsildar had
given 24 hours notice to give reply to the petitioner and since the

¶13

WP No.2318/22

¶14

¶15

petitioner did not give reply within 24 hours, the penalty is imposed.
The order was passed after several months from the date of issuance of
alleged show cause notice. In our view, the impugned order is passed
without following the principles of natural justice and thus, deserves
to be quashed and set aside.

¶16

4.Hence, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The
matter is remanded back to the concerned authority for considering
the show cause notice in accordance with provisions of law.

¶17

5.Copy of show cause notice shall be served upon the
petitioner within one week from the date of issuance of such notice.
The petitioner shall file reply to the show cause notice within two
weeks thereafter. The Sub Divisional Officer shall decide the matter
within six weeks thereafter.

¶18

6.The petitioner is directed to deposit sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees one lakh) in the office of Tahsildar within one week from
today without fail. The amount shall be accepted by the office of
Tahsildar. The sum of deposit shall be subject to the outcome of the
order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer in the proceeding of show
cause notice issued by the Tahsildar.

¶19

7.Upon deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) by the
petitioner, the office of Tahsildar shall release the vehicle described in

¶20

WP No.2318/22

¶21

¶22

prayer clause ‘B’ of the petition without 24 hours thereafter. The
petitioner shall not dispose of the said vehicle during the pendency of
the proceeding of show cause notice before Sub Divisional Officer.

¶23

8.The order that would be passed by the Sub Divisional
Officer shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week from
the date of passing of such order. If the show cause notice is
withdrawn, the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) deposited
by the petitioner shall be refunded to the petitioner and if the order is
adverse against the petitioner and if the demand is more than
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh), no coercive steps shall be taken
against the petitioner for the period of two weeks thereafter.

¶24

9.Writ petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms with no

¶25

order as to costs.

¶26

[ S.G. MEHARE, J. ] [ R. D. DHANUKA, J. ]

¶27

ssc/

Basudev Matoliram Agrawal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basudev Matoliram Agrawal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Datta Govind Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Laxmikant Vitthal Ghayal Vs Laxman Govind Raut and Others

Bharatbhushan Sonajirao Kshirsagar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sunita Mashnaji Kantewad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shankar Ghanshyam Borude Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Padminbai Khandoji Bhandare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others