(1) 930wp218.219.16 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.218/2016 Umesh Devchand Bhure .Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. AND WRIT PETITION NO.219/2016 Umesh Hariram Bhotmange .Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. T. H. Bewali, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. K. R. Lule, A.G.P. for respondents-State. CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 27, 2026. Heard. 2. Challenge is to notices dated 26.10.2015, issued by respondent No.2 – Sub Divisional Officer, Bhandara, calling upon the petitioners to show cause as to why the vehicles under question i.e. tractors bearing Nos.MH-36/L-56 and MH-36/L-5457, should be not seized and sold through auction. The notice is given on account of breach of the condition by the petitioners, wherein, on earlier occasion, the tractors were seized for unauthorised transport of minerals i.e. Murum. The petitioners had given an undertaking, while seeking release of tractors before the revenue authority, that the tractors will not be utilized for such purpose. Despite such undertaking, the petitioners deployed the tractors for transportation of minerals i.e. Murum and, therefore, show cause is issued. 3. The vehicles have been released in terms of interim order passed by this Court on 15.02.2016. 4. Argument is that there are no powers under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (“MLR Code”) to auction the vehicle in the case where it is used for unauthorised transportation of minor minerals or similar such purposes. (2) 930wp218.219.16 5. We have gone through Section 48 of the MLR Code to find that the argument is valid. The revenue officials may impose penalty but have no powers to auction the vehicle on breach of the condition, as noted above. 6. The writ petitions are accordingly allowed. Show cause notices dated 26.10.2015 are quashed and set aside. Respondents, however, are at liberty to take action in terms of Section 48 of the MLR Code, if there is no other legal impediment. The revenue authorities shall take a decision as regards penalty deposited by petitioners in terms of order dated 15.02.2016, as to whether the petitioners are liable to pay penalty or not. The decision shall be taken within four weeks from today. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kahale