ANKUSH KASHINATH MHASKE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE AND FOREST DEPT AND ORS
Refund for Un-excavated Sand - High Court Directs Reconsideration Considering Villager Opposition and Government Policy on Sand Excavation.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:19747-DB
Decision Date: 30-04-2025
List of Laws
Constitution of India, Article 226; Constitution of India, Article 227; Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, Section 258; Government Resolution dated 12.03.2013; Sand Excavation Policy; Principle of Estoppel by Conduct
- Facts: The Petitioner was a successful bidder for sand excavation in 2015. Villagers opposed the excavation, and the Petitioner requested permission to use a suction pump, which was not granted. The Petitioner excavated only a portion of the permitted sand and sought a refund for the un-excavated amount. The District Collector rejected the refund request, which was upheld by the Additional Secretary. A review was partly allowed, and the matter was remanded. The Committee rejected the claim, and the State confirmed the rejection. The Petitioner alleges inability to excavate due to village opposition and submerged sand-ghats.
- Procedural Posture: The Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order rejecting the claim for a refund of the amount for un-excavated sand.
- Issue: Is the Petitioner entitled to a refund for the un-excavated sand, considering the opposition from villagers, the submergence of sand-ghats, and the denial of permission to use a suction pump?
- Holding: The Court partially allowed the writ petition, directing Respondent No. 4 (Collector) to hear the Petitioner and other concerned parties and decide whether the Petitioner was obstructed by local villagers and, if so, to what extent the Petitioner is entitled to a proportional refund for un-excavated sand as per clause 17-(C)-(15) of the applicable Government Resolution.
- Reasoning: The Court noted that the Government Resolution (GR) contemplates a refund in case of inability to excavate due to villagers' opposition, as held in Wasim Khan Material Suppliers Vs. State of Maharashtra. The Court found no explanation in the Affidavits-in-Reply regarding the procedure followed on the Petitioner's request and the material concerning the opposition from local villagers. The Court applied the principle of 'estoppel by conduct' to the extent that the Petitioner entered into an agreement and took possession of the sand-ghats with open eyes, but acknowledged the need to consider the impact of village opposition on the Petitioner's ability to excavate. The Court directed the Collector to determine the extent of obstruction and the proportional refund, if any, within a specified timeframe.
🔒 For Members Only