LALIT MOHANLAL SHARMAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     C/SCA/962/2026                              JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 962 of 2026


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
================================================================

            Approved for Reporting               Yes          No

================================================================
                        LALIT MOHANLAL SHARMA
                                 Versus
                        STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MS KRUTI M SHAH WITH MR JAY N SHAH(10668) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1
MR ANGESH A PANCHAL, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
================================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
       PRACHCHHAK

                             Date : 23/03/2026

                               JUDGMENT


1.      Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government
Pleader Mr. Angesh Panchal, waives service of notice of Rule for and
on behalf of the respondents – State Authorities.


2.      With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties, the petition has been taken up for $nal hearing
today.


3.      By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India read with the provisions of the Gujarat Mines and Minerals



                                 Page 1 of 9
   C/SCA/962/2026                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




(Regulations and Development) Act, 1957 (hereinafter be referred to
as “the Act”) and under the provisions of the Gujarat Mineral
(Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017
and under the provisions of the Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession
Rules, 2017, petitioner has challenged the ex-parte order dated
03.01.2026 passed by the Geologist (In-charge), Geology and Mining
Department, Bharuch and has prayed for the following reliefs :

      “(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or
      direction, for quashing and setting aside the order dated 3.1.2026
      (Annexure-H) passed by the Geologist (In-charge), Geology and Mining
      Department, Bharuch whereby the quarry permit granted to the petitioner
      has been cancelled before the expiry of 45 days;

      (B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or
      direction to hold that the Mines Supervisor does not have jurisdiction to
      exercise powers under Rule 12(2)(a) of the Gujarat Mineral (Illegal Mining,
      Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 and further be pleased to hold
      that the seizure procedure undertaken by the Mines Supervisor on
      31.12.2025 and 1.1.2026 is without jurisdiction and further be pleased to
      direct the authorities to immediately release Volvo excavator machine
      which is seized under seizure memo dated 1.1.2026 (Annexure-E);

      (C) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or
      direction, directing the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to immediately decide
      application dated 13.11.2025 for the grant of quarry permit for 1 lakh MT
      ordinary clay which is annexed at Annexure-B;

      (D) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or
      direction for quashing and setting aside the notice dated 3.1.2026
      (Annexure-F) issued by the Geologist, Bharuch;

      (DD) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or
      direction for quashing and setting aside the order dated 10.02.2026 passed
      by the Geologist, Geology and Mining Department, Bharuch (Annexure-I-5);

      (DDD) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or
      direction for quashing and setting aside communication dated 11.02.2026
      issued by the Geologist, Geology and Mining Department, Bharuch
      (Annexure-I-6);

      (E) Pending admission hearing and =nal disposal of this petition, Your
      Lordships may be pleased to stay the further proceedings in pursuance of
      the notice dated 3.1.2026 (Annexure-F);

      (F) Pending admission hearing and =nal disposal of this petition, Your


                                   Page 2 of 9
     C/SCA/962/2026                                  JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




        Lordships may be pleased to stay the execution, implementation and
        operation of the notice dated 3.1.2026 (Annexure-F) issued by the
        Geologist, Bharuch;

        (FF) Pending admission hearing and =nal disposal of this petition, Your
        Lordships may be pleased to stay the execution, implementation and
        operation of the order dated 10.02.2026 passed by the Geologist, Geology
        and Mining Department, Bharuch (Annexure-I-5);

        (FFF) Pending admission hearing and =nal disposal of this petition, Your
        Lordships may be pleased to stay the execution, implementation and
        operation of the communication dated 11.02.2026 issued by the Geologist,
        Geology and Mining Department, Bharuch (Annexure-I-6);

        (G) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant any other relief/s which deems
        =t and proper in the interest of justice.”


4.      Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the
petitioner had applied by Application No.21478 for grant of a quarry
permit under Rule 21(1) of the Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession
Rules, 2017 for removal of ordinary clay to the tune of 10,000 MT
from Survey No.226 of Village: Aladar, Taluka: Vagra, District:
Bharuch. That, vide order dated 12.12.2025, the District Geologist (In-
charge), Bharuch has granted quarry permit for excavation and
removal of matric tonnes of 10,000 ordinary clay and the petitioner
had made payment as indicated in the said order and the validity of
the permit was for 45 days from the date of activation. That, the
petitioner had also made another Application No.21486 on 13.11.2025
for grant of quarry permit for ordinary clay of 1 lakh MT from the very
same survey number which was received by the concerned o>ce on
24.11.2025 and the same was pending for its consideration. That, at
the time of doing excavation, on 25.12.2025 one underground ONGC
pipeline was found out and the petitioner informed the concerned
Sarpanch, owner of the land and the inspection o>cer of ONGC and
they had inspected the said place and it was informed to the
petitioner that the said line was non-functional since 10 years and he



                                    Page 3 of 9
    C/SCA/962/2026                              JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




may continue to do excavation work by leaving that part of the land
and the petitioner had continued excavation work ensuring that no
damages cause to the said line. That, on 31.12.2025, Mines
Supervisor, upon the instructions of Sub Divisional Magistrate and
Mamlatdar, Bharuch, had come near the area of the quarry permit
and has without jurisdiction and illegally seized 4 vehicles, i.e. GJ-16-
AY-2376, GJ-16-AY-8873, GJ-16-AY-0699, GJ-16-AV-3862 and issued
notice of seizure under Rule 12(2)(a). That, though the Mines
Supervisor does not have jurisdiction under Rule 12(2)(a) to seize the
vehicles, seizure was made, the threats were made for criminal
proceedings and on the spot, the penalty amount totalling to the tune
of Rs.9,15,600/- was forced to be paid by the petitioner. That, again
without any notice and without informing the petitioner, upon the
letter written by Mamlatdar, Vagra, one inspection team along with
panchas, Sarpanch of Aladar village, Circle O>cer inspected the area
of the quarry permit and the inspection was carried out without
following any due procedure of law and without giving any documents
whatsoever to the present petitioner and again one seizure memo
was drawn by Mines Supervisor under Rule 12(2)(a) and 13 and seized
Volvo excavator machine again without authority of law. That, on
03.01.2026, one notice came to be issued by In-charge Geologist by
stating that on 01.01.2026 (wrongly stated as 1.1.2025) that the
measurement was undertaken by GPS machine and the measurement
sheet was prepared and as per the online details, the petitioner has
mined 858.97 MT ordinary clay outside the permit area, but as per the
measurement sheet, he has mined 5810.17 MT illegally outside the
quarry permit area and he was asked to pay the penalty of total
Rs.16,33,660/- and he was asked to respond to the said notice within
a period of 7 days. That, the petitioner made a representation on
03.01.2026 by stating that he has been targeted and initial permit for


                                Page 4 of 9
   C/SCA/962/2026                                     JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




10,000 MT was given after a lot of eDorts of 1 month and continuous
visit to the o>ce of the Geologist and he has undertaken excavation
as per the instructions given from the o>ce of Geologist and though
his bulk permit application was pending since long, the same was not
decided and he had already informed about ONGC pipeline to the
concerned authorities immediately and the entire proceedings are
undertaken against him with malice and SDM has misbehaved with
him and questioned the procedure of asking the petitioner to pay the
penalty of around Rs.10 lakh on the spot and further requested to
immediately process his application pending for grant of quarry
permit to the tune of 1 lakh MT. That, the petitioner replied notice
dated 03.01.2026 on 17.01.2026 asking necessary documents relied
upon by the authority seeking to impose penalty to tune of
Rs.16,33,660/-.     That   at   present,        the   proceedings       regarding
determination of penalty are pending and before that, the impugned
order of cancellation of quarry permit is passed. That, the present
petition came up for hearing before this Court on 29.01.2026 and
after hearing, this Court issued notice upon the respondent authorities
making it returnable on 20.02.2026. During the course of the
arguments, it was submitted before this Court that the hearing of the
notice impugned in the present petition is $xed on 29.01.2026 and it
was indicated by this Court to bring to the notice of the authority
regarding issuance of notice by this Court in the present matter and
on 29.01.2026, the petitioner had presented application dated
29.01.2026 before the Geologist asking time for making submissions
in respect of the impugned notice dated 03.01.2026. That, on the very
next day on 30.01.2026, the o>ce of the Geologist sent another
notice by stating that the documents demanded and not supplied are
sent on WhatsApp at 04.59 p.m. on 30.01.2026 and again asked the
petitioner to remain present on 04.02.2026. That, after $ling of the


                                  Page 5 of 9
     C/SCA/962/2026                           JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




petition before this Court, the documents were provided from the
o>ce of the Geologist with communication dated 21.01.2026,
consisting of Rojkam dated 31.12.2025, statement dated 01.01.2026,
Panch Rojkam dated 01.01.2026, seizure form, lease holder issued
pass information, map along with the photographs. That, the
petitioner had personally remained present before the o>ce of the
Geologist on 04.02.2026 by stating to postpone the hearing after
20.02.2026 i.e. the date $xed by this Court in the present petition.
That, the writ of this Court of notice in the captioned petition was
served upon the Geologist on 03.02.2026. That, in Eagrant violation of
the principles of natural justice and by completely disregarding the
fact of pendency of Special Civil Application No. 962 of 2026, wherein
one of the prayers is challenged to the impugned notice dated
03.01.2026, the Geologist has passed order dated 10.02.2026 of
imposing penalty of Rs. 16,33,660/-. That, the petitioner received
another communication dated 11.02.2026 from the o>ce of the
Geologist stating that the petitioner was earlier informed by letter
dated 06.01.2025 (it has to be 06.01.2026) to produce No Objection
Certi$cate of ONGC, which the petitioner has not submitted till date
and upon submission of No Objection Certi$cate by ONGC and upon
payment of Rs.16,33,660/- as per the show cause notice dated
03.01.2026, the online application no. 21486 dated 13.11.2025
submitted by the petitioner would be further processed. That, the
impugned order dated 10.02.2026 and the above communication
dated 11.02.2026 were served upon the petitioner on 16.02.2026.


5.      Being aggrieved and dissatis$ed with the impugned orders
dated 03.01.2026 passed by the Geologist, (In-charge), Geology and
Mining Department, Bharuch, the petitioner has preferred this
petition.


                               Page 6 of 9
     C/SCA/962/2026                                     JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




6.      Heard Ms. Kruti M. Shah, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Jay N.
Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Angesh Panchal,
learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents
– State Authorities.


7.      Learned counsel Ms. Shah has submitted that the impugned
order passed by the respondent authority is illegal and against the
provisions of the Act and the Rules and is passed in gross violation of
principles of natural justice and therefore, the same is required to be
quashed and set aside. She has submitted that though the present
petition was preferred by the petitioner and notice was also issued by
this Court vide order dated 29.02.2026 making it returnable on
20.02.2026, which was served upon the o>ce of the Geologist on
03.02.2026 and the o>ce of the Geologist has also received copy of
the notice, however, without considering the fact that the matter is
pending adjudication before this Court, the respondent authority has
passed another order on 10.02.2026 since they had supplied the
documents        as   required   by     the     petitioner   on WhatsApp             no.
9898046117 on 30.01.2026 at 4.59 p.m. She has submitted that since
the matter was pending before this Court, the petitioner could not
remain present before the respondent authority on 10.02.2026 and
therefore, the respondent authority has passed the order dated
10.02.2026 imposing penalty upon the petitioner, since there was no
need to supply any documents to the petitioner. She has further
submitted that without considering the fact that the $rst order passed
by the respondent authority on 03.01.2026 was challenged before this
Court by way present petition and which is pending adjudication till
date, the respondent authority passed another order on 10.02.2026,
though the o>ce of the respondent authority was served with the


                                      Page 7 of 9
     C/SCA/962/2026                            JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




notice of this Court and thus, the respondent authority has tried to
overreach the process of this Court, as the concerned authority was
intimated by two communications that the notice impugned is under
challenge before this Court and the hearing of the matter is $xed on
20.02.2026 and therefore, the impugned orders passed by the
respondent authority are required to be quashed and set aside. Over
and above the grounds agitated in the memo of petition, learned
counsel Ms. Shah has urged that the present petition be allowed and
the impugned orders passed by the respondent authority be quashed
and set aside.


8.      Today, learned AGP Mr. Angesh Panchal, appearing for the
respondent authorities, has tendered a>davit-in-reply $led on behalf
of the respondent No.4 and submitted that under the circumstances
narrated in the a>davit-in-reply and the documents appended with
the same, the impugned order is passed, however, they have not
stated anything with regard to the fact that though the petition was
pending before this Court and notice was received by the o>ce of the
Geologist, why they have proceeded further and on the contrary, the
respondent No.4 has tried to explain before this Court referring to
paragraphs 18 onwards, more particularly the averments made in
paragraphs 24 and 28.


9.      I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective
parties and perused the material placed on record. Considering the
submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the
opinion that without entering into the merits, the matter is required to
be remanded back for deciding the issue afresh.



                                Page 8 of 9
          C/SCA/962/2026                                                        JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




  10.        In the result, the present petition is partly allowed. The
  impugned orders dated 03.01.2026 and 10.02.2026 passed by the
  Geology and Mining Department, Bharuch are hereby quashed and
  set aside. The matter is remanded back for deciding the issue afresh
  not by the same o>cer but, to be heard by the concerned Collector on
  the ground of breach of principles of natural justice, after aDording an
  opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after giving an
  opportunity to produce all the relevant documents. The same shall be
  decided as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 8
  (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of writ of this Order, in
  accordance with law, without being inEuenced by the earlier orders as
  well as this Order. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
             Direct service is permitted.



                                                                      (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)

  Dolly




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: DOLLYBEN CHETANBHAI VADUKAR(HC01392), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/03/2026 17:23:00


                                                      Page 9 of 9