RAJESH MAHTHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dtd. 3/3/2021 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 2 - Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro in Confiscation Case No. 07 of 2019-20, whereby the tractors belonging to the petitioners have been directed to be confiscated under the provisions of Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to release the aforesaid tractors of the petitioners on furnishing such sureties/securities as the Court may deem fit and proper and within a specified time.

(2.) At the outset, Mr. Mithilesh Singh, learned GA-IV appearing on behalf of the respondents, raises a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioners have efficacious remedy of filing revision before the Mines Commissioner, Jharkhand under rule 15(i) of the Rules, 2017 against the impugned order dtd. 3/3/2021 passed by the respondent no. 2.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view that the petitioners have efficacious remedy against the impugned order dtd. 3/3/2021 passed by the respondent no. 2 by preferring a revision before the Mines Commissioner, Jharkhand in terms with rule 15(i) of the Rules, 2017, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition on merit at this stage. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to prefer a revision before the Mines Commissioner, Jharkhand.