VIKAS PANCHAYAT Vs. THE COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that the respondent No. 2 was holding a lease in respect of mica mines from the Rajasthan Government and the waste mica was deposited by him on the land belonging to the Vikas Panchayat, Barsani. On October 2, 1960, the aforesaid Panchayat issued a notice to the respondent No. 2 directing him to remove the mica waste before October 12, 1950, failing which he would be liable to pay a fine at the rate of one rupee per day till the mica waste was removed. The Vikas Panchayat, Barsani, imposed a fine of 2241/ - upon the respondent No. 2 by its order dated March 28, 1960 for the non -removal of the mica waste, inspite of notice, Meanwhile, the lease of the respondent No. 2 expired on October 31, 1952 and his case was that in accordance with the notification issued by the State Government dated February 6, 1951 all mica waste vested in the State Government, after six months of the expiry of the lease of the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 preferred an appeal before the Tehsil Panchayat, which was dismissed. Ultimately, he filed a writ petition before this Court, being S.B. Civil writ petition No. 228 of 1962 -Pusalal Mansinghka Private Limited vs. Vikas Panchayat, Barsani and another, which was decided by this Court on January 23, 1963. This Court partly allowed the writ petition filed by respondent No. 2 and the orders passed by the Vikas Panchayat, Barsani and the Tehsil Panchayat were set aside and it was held that the Vikas Panchayat was only entitled to recover Rs. 173/ - from the respondent No. 2 towards fine it the rate of rupee one per day upto April 4, 1951. This Court also expressed the view that in case the Vikas Panchayat thereafter proceeded to consider the matter relating to imposition of fine on the respondent No. 2 for the period after April 4, 1951, then the question as to whether the respondent No. 2 could not subsequently remove the mica waste, as the same vested in the State Government by virtue of the notification dated February 6, 1951, could be raised and decided by the Vikas Panchayat.

(2.) After the aforesaid decision of this Court, the Vikas Panchayat gave a notice to the respondent No. 2 about its intention to impose fine upon it for the period after April 4, 1951. The respondent No. 2 came out with the defence that as his lease of mica mine in question had expired with effect from October 31, 1952 waste mica vested in the State Government on the expiry of six months after the determination of the lease of the respondent No. 2 and as such no fine could be imposed or collected by the Vikas Panchayat from the said respondent for the subsequent period. The Vikas Panchayat by its order on January 16, 1965, imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,031/ - upon the respondent No. 2 for the period from April 4, 1951 to January 16, 1965, at the rate of rupee one per day on account of his failure to remove the mica waste. The petitioner filed in appeal before, the Panchayat Samiti, which took the view that the petitioner had informed the Panchayat on May 15, 1963 that the waste mica vested in the State Govt. and he was unable to lift the same, as it was Government property and, therefore, penalty can be imposed upon the petitioner only for the period from April 4, 1951 upto May 15, 1963. Consequently, the appeal of the respondent No. 2 was partly allowed and the amount of penalty imposed upon him was reduced to Rs. 4,421/ -. The respondent No. 2 thereafter filed a revision application before the Collector, Bhilwara, who by his order dated April 19, 1971, allowed the revision application and held that as the waste mica belonged to the State Government, the respondent No. 2 was unable to remove the same & no fine could be imposed upon him for the non removal thereof. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order of the Collector, Bhilwara, on the ground that a proper opportunity of hearing was not afforded to the petitioner, Vikas Panchayat, by him.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The respondent No. 2 had raised the question regarding his non -liability due to the expiry of the term of his lease, even before this Court at the time of the hearing of the earlier writ petition No. 228 of 1962 (Pusalal Mansinghka Private Limited v/s. Vikas Panchayat, Barsani and another). It was then urged on his behalf before this Court that the mica waste became the property of the State Government, as it vested in the State Government after a period of six months from the date of the expiry of the lease of the respondent No. 2 & as such the said respondent could not be made liable for payment of any fine thereafter. This Court in earlier writ petition held that as the Vikas Panchayat had not passed any order for the imposition of fine upon the petitioner after April 4, 1951, it was not necessary in that case to decide the question whether the mica waste had vested in the State Government by virtue of the notification on February 6, 1951. However, it was observed that the aforesaid notification admittedly applied after the termination of the lease of the respondent No. 2, which expired on October 31, 1952. After the decision of this Court in the earlier writ petition, the Vikas Panchayat considered the matter and although it did not controvert the submission of the respondent No. 2 that after the expiry of six months from the date of termination of the lease of the said respondent, the mica waste became the property of the State Government, yet it proceeded to impose a penalty upon the respondent No. 2 on the ground that the respondent No. 2 did not earlier bring the Government notification in this respect to the notice of the Vikas Panchayat. On appeal, the Panchayat Samiti imposed a penalty upon the respondent No. 2 at the rate of rupee one per day from April 4, 1951 to May 15, 1963, on the ground that the respondent No. 2 had brought to the notice of the Vikas Panchayat only on the last mentioned date that the property in the mica waste vested in the State Government, on account of the notification on February 6, 1951. The Panchayat Samiti also did not dispute the fact that the mica waste became the property of the State Government in accordance with the notification dated February 6, 1951, and as a matter of fact by imposing penalty upon the respondent No. 2 only upto May 15, 1963, the Panchayat Samiti impliedly accepted the confer tion of the respondent No. 2 in this respect. The Vikas Panchayat as well as the Panchayat Samiti also did not pass any order directing the respondent No. 2 to lift the mica waste now presumably because the said mica waste had vested in the State Government, the Vikas Panchayat had no locus standi to take proceedings against the respondent No. 2 for the removal of the same. Therefore, the cast of the respondent No. 2 that after a period of six months from the date of the expiry of the lease of the said respondent, the mica waste vested in the State Government appears to have been accepted by the aforesaid bodies. It is undisputed that the lease of the respondent No. 2 expired on October 31, 1952, and six months therefrom ended on June 30, 1953. Thus the Vikas Panchayat was not entitled to recover any amount by way of fire from the respondent No. 2 for the period subsequent to June 30, 1953, because the respondent No. 2 could not be made liable for non -removal of the mica waste after the aforesaid date, when it ceased to be his property and became the property of the State Government. In this view of the matter, the respondent No. 2 was liable for payment of fine at the rate of rupee one per day, in accordance with the order of the Vikas Panchayat for the period from April 4, 1951 to June 30, 1953. The Collector has held that the mica waste became the property of the State Government and, therefore, no amount could be recovered from the respondent No. 2 by way of penalty or fine for the non -removal thereof. But he failed to consider that so far as the period from April 4, 1951 to June 30, 1953 is concerned, the said mica waste continued to remain the property of the respondent No. 2 and he was entitled to remove the same and was, therefore, liable for the non removal of the said mica waste during that period. Thus the Vikas Panchayat could impose a fine of rupee one per day on the respondent No. 2 in respect of the aforesaid period. The Collector, Bhilwara so far as it has the effect of setting aside the order of Panchayat Samiti relating to the period from April 4, 1951 to June 30, 1953, suffers from an error apparent on the face thereof. However, it may be made clear that the respondent No. 2 could only he made liable for payment of penalty or fine at the rate of rupee one per day for the period from April 4, 1951 to June 30, 1953, and not for any period thereafter.