AMIT Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed against order dated 08.11.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Palwal whereby the application filed by the petitioner for releasing the vehicle Tractor on Superdari has been rejected.

(2.) The brief facts of the case which can been seen from the file would be that vide Annexure P-1, the vehicle belonging to the petitioner was seized under Sub-rule 104 of The Haryana Minor Mineral Concession, Stocking, Transportation of Minerals and Prevention of Illegal Mining Rules, 2012 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Rules'). Learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter, moved an application before the learned Illaqa Magistrate, Palwal (Annexure P-5) for releasing the vehicle Tractor on Superdari to the petitioner who is stated to be the owner of the vehicle. Learned Illaqa Magistrate, Palwal vide impugned order has dismissed the application on the ground that as per Rule 104 of the Rules; the consequences of illegal or un-authorised mining have been specifically provided the provisions of Rules 104 which is reproduced as under:-

(3.) Learned Illaqa Magistrate, Palwal has further observed that against the action taken by the Mining Officer (Officer Incharge), an appeal lies to the Director under Rule 109 of the Rules is reproduced as under:-