ALAM SHAKIL HUSENBHAI Vs. DEPUTY FOREST CONSERVATOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking relief to quash and set aside order dated 562014 passed by respondent No. 1 and to release the truck No. GJ17X7611 in favour of petitioner.

(2.) Facts in short are that the petitioner is the owner of truck bearing registration No. GJ17X7611 which he purchased from Shri Arvindbhai Keshubhai Patel on 6 -2 -2012. The petitioner is engaged in the business of transportation of dolomite power and miscellaneous products to Surat and Valsad and also giving the truck on rent. On 2 -3 -2014, one Shri Bachubhai Kaljibhai Rathva took the said truck on rent for transportation of goods. However, as the said truck was found to be carrying Nilgiri woods from forest area, it was detained by respondent No. 2 at Bandi Village. A complaint in this regard was registered against the petitioner and said Bachubhai Kaljibhai Rathva for the offences punishable under Sections 53, 55 and 61(a) to 61(g) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 ('the Act' for short) and their statements were recorded on 3 -3 -2014 in which the petitioner showed voluntariness to pay fine and to release the vehicle. However, a show cause notice dated 3 -4 -2014 was issued by respondent No. 1 asking as to why the truck in question should not be vested in the Government. A reply was given by the petitioner on 7 -4 -2014 denying any involvement in the offence and reiterating his willingness to pay the penalty for releasing the vehicle and to compound the offence. The petitioner made representation on 2 -5 -2014. Since there was no response, the petitioner preferred Special Civil Application No. 7142 of 2014. Said petition was disposed of directing to decide the representation in accordance with law within 10 days. However, instead of deciding the said representation, the impugned order was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing. Hence, the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Heard learned Advocate, Mr.Navin Pahwa for M/s Thakkar Associates for the petitioner and learned AGP, Mr.K.L.Pandya for the respondents.