Smt. Sangeeta Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Mining and Natural Resources | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

Smt. Sangeeta Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Mining and Natural Resources | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the learned Collector, Balrampur to decide the petitioners' pending application for interim custody of the seized vehicle, preferably within 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; the prayers for records and for quashing the orders dated 22.08.2023 & 05.04.2023 (Annexure P-1 & P-2) were not adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Collector, Balrampur should be directed to decide the petitioners' pending application (moved 28.03.2023) for interim custody of the seized JCB vehicle Regn. No. CG-30B-1601, which had not been decided. +1 more

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the limited grievance of the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Collector, Balrampur to decide the pending application for interim custody of the seized vehicle, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WPC No. 292 of 2024, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur (Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.), decided 05.03.2024 (marked NAFR). Petitioners Sangeeta Yadav and Rajaram sought release/interim custody of a JCB vehicle (Regn. No. CG-30B-1601) owned by petitioner No. 1, seized by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Balrampur in connection with an offence punishable under Section 21(i) and (v) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, and stated to be lying at the Police Station without care. An application for interim custody moved before the Collector, Balrampur on 28.03.2023 had remained undecided. The Court, taking into consideration this limited grievance, disposed of the writ petition, directing the learned Collector, Balrampur to decide the pending interim-custody application preferably within 45 days of receipt of a copy of the order. The prayers to call for records and to quash/set aside the orders dated 22.08.2023 & 05.04.2023 (Annexure P-1 & P-2) were not adjudicated; no precedent was cited and no merits determination was made.

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 292 of 2024

1. Smt. Sangeeta Yadav W/o Shri Ram Charit Yadav Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Rahnat, P.S. Chalgali, Tahsil Daura Kochli, District BalrampurRamanujganj (C.G.)

2. Rajaram S/o Bishwanath Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Rahnat, P.S. Chalgali, Tahsil Daura Kochli, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Department Of Mines And Minerals Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.)

2. The Collector OfÏce Of Collectorate, Department Of Mining, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.)

3. The Upper Collector (Incharge) Mining OfÏce Of Collectorate, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.)

4. The Commissioner Revenue Divisional Commissioner, Surguja Division, Surguja Ambikapur (C.G.)

5. Sub Divisional Magistrate (Revenue) Sub Division Raipur, District BalrampurRamanujganj (C.G.)

6. The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Rajpur District BalrampurRamanujganj (C.G.)

---- Respondents

(Cause Title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioners

For State

: Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate

: Mr. Keshav Gupta, Government Advocate

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

05.03.2024

1. By way of the instant petition, the petitioners have made the following prayer(s):-

“ 10.1. To call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.

10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set aside the order dated 22.08.2023 & 05.04.2023 (Annexure P-1 & P- 2).

10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to released the vehicle to the petitioner.

10.4. That, any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioner No. 1 is the

owner of a JCB vehicle bearing registration No. CG-30B-1601 seized by the Sub-

2

Divisional OfÏcer (Revenue), Balrampur in connection with an offence punishable under Section 21(i) and (v) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. He would further submit that the seized vehicle is lying at the Police Station without any care. He would also submit that an application for interim custody of the vehicle was moved before the Collector, Balrampur on 28.03.2023 but till date, the same has not been decided. He would contend that a suitable direction may be issued to the concerned Collector to decide the pending application expeditiously.

3. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State would oppose.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

5. Taking into consideration the limited grievance of the petitioners, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Collector, Balrampur to decide the pending application moved by the petitioners for interim custody of the seized vehicle preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the present writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

amita