Heard learned advocate appearing for the petitioner in these group of petitions.
In these group of petitions, the release of vehicle is prayed which came to be seized on account of the allegation of illegal mining and transportation of mines and minerals. The Rule 18 of the Gujarat Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2005 provides for releasing of the vehicle on owner furnishing sufficient bond for production of the vehicle as and when required in the proceedings.
It is indeed unfortunate that these petitions were required to be filed, as there was no action on the part of the authorities, as could be seen from the averments made in the memo of the petition that when approached, the concerned officer informed them to obtain Court's order. If this allegation is correct it betrays propensity shirking from the duty cast under the statutory rules which requires deprecation but as the matters are being disposed of without going into this allegation, suffice it to say that the petitioner, if approaches the authority concerned with appropriate bond, as envisaged and provided under Rule 18, then the authority shall act strictly in accordance with Rule 18 for releasing the vehicle without undue delay.
With this observation, petitions are disposed of with a liberty to approach this Court again, in case of difficulty.
At this stage learned AGP submitted that Rule 18 would not be applicable as the said Rule envisaged applicability of the same only in the event of seizer of the vehicle under Rule 13 and in the instant case, as could be seen from the seizer memo it is also seized under Rule 17. Be that as it may, if it is not applicable, then also the officer will have to pass reasoned order indicating as to why the said Rule 17 is not evocable which is of course subject matter and further scrutiny by this Court in a writ petition, as the liberty to approach the Court is deserve to the petitioners. Direct service is permitted.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) Pankaj Top