High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in detaining the Polished Granite (Colour) Slabs along with Vehicle No.AP39UZ'1959 and keeping in the safe custody of the 2nd Respondent vide Lr.No.1425Nigilance/2015, dated 06.01 .2025 though the goods are covered by Tax lnvoice and e-way bill, is arbitrary, contrary to law, without jurisdiction, biased, frivolous, contrary to the Article 14, 21 , 265 and 3004 of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently set aside the Detention vide Lr.No.1425Nigilancei2015, dated 06.01 .2025 and direct the Respondents 1 and 2 to release the goods and goods vehicle No. AP3lUZ 1959 immediately lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents 1 and 2 to release the goods and goods vehicle No. AP39UZ of the Detention vide t Respondent 1s59 forthwith, by suspending the- ^ -operatiol il",ul, toiuni,E,t^n"Zix'ts'dated 06 0I'2025 of the 1s Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos'1&3: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY Counsel for the Respondent NO'2: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.2711 of 2025 OR DER: Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geologr appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 & 3, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 and with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage'

2. It is the contention of the petitioner that he is transporting the finished granite slabs from the State of Andhra Pradesh to the State of Maharashtra in Lorry bearing No.AP 39 UZ lg1g under the cover of tax invoice and waybill obtained on the GST Portal; and that the respondent authorities have detained the same claiming that seigniorage fee has not been paid on the subject goods in terms of Section 2 1 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 ( for short 'the Actl, and as such, in exercise of powers conferred under the Act, the said goods are liable for confiscation.

3. Petitioner further contends that the respondent authorities, while issuing the impugned proceeding, have mentioned the 't I :'i: i, :t a i 2 subject vehicle number wrongly in the impugned proce eding in respect of the subject vehicle as KA 39 UZ 1956. 4 . Petitioner fr"rrther contends that as the subject goods under transportation are finished goods and are covered by tax invoices and u.'ay bill evidencing purchase of goods lrom a registered Tax Dealer in the State of Andhra Pradesh, the claim of the respondents for payment of seigniorage fee cannoi be held to be valid in the light of the judgment of this Court dt. 15.06.2016 passed in W.P.No.18030 of 2016.

5. Per contra., learned Government Pleader for Home appearing cn behalf of respondent No.2, on instructions, submits tha t the number of vehicle seized is the same as mentioned in the waybill, and thus, the 1"t responrlent has mentioned the 1orry number u/rongly in t he irnpugned proceeding.

6. Learnecl Government Pleader further submits that the petitioner b1' mentioning the goods under transport a:; 'granite slabs' in the tax invoice, is transporting the semi- hnished/unlinished/ uncut s1abs, on which he is required to pay seigniorage 1ee.

7. I have taken note of the respective submissions made l'r B. Having regard to the submissions made as above and taking note of the fact that the subject goods are supported by tax invoice and waybill generated on the GST portal, this Court is of the view that the respondent authorities are to be directed to verify the description of the goods as mentioned in the tax invoice with the goods under transport, and if it is found that the subject goods are finished goods, cut/granite slabs as mentioned in the description of the tax invoice, the respondent authorities shall allow further movement of the vehicle.

9. However, during such inspection, if the authorities ltnd that the subject goods are semi-finished/unfinished/uncut slabs requiring to be worked upon, the respondent authorities are at liberty to ta-ke further action in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules framed lhereunder

10. Subject to above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 1 1. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in I these writ petitions shali stand closed //TRUE COPY// ^,3PJ+klE3'E+RtR / v SEGTION OFFICER \ To, 1 2 The Assistant Director of M +l':tr*:n'a:lJs's?P'"T: SangareddY District' ines and Geology, Sangareddy' Sangareddy ir.S., Cniragpatly, Mogudampally Mandal' :l .t &l ? The Secretary to Government, Mines and Geology Departmenl, Telangana -' Secretariat, HYderabad t ?*: $i{'sl :'BIgn*=txN,'ePH63Yfi3J33y.?or rhe state of -' Telanoana. [O[JT] o i[j;'id]i"'cp tbl. Home, High court for the state of Telangana at z. trfuo CD CoPies Hvderabad [OUT] KKSu CC TODAY HIGH COURT TVK,J DATED:31 10112025 >----: \ ',- ', 1 I,J $1iii ta) t .. I I ORDER WP.No.2711 of 2025 \ \ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 7 \ 3-