1 CRIWP56.01 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 56 OF 2001 Pandurang Rama Deokar, Age : 74 years, Occ : Agri, R/o Pimplas, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. ..PETITIONER -VERSUS- 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. The Collector, Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar. ..RESPONDENTS ..... Shri V.D. Hon, advocate for the applicant. Smt. S.D. Shelke, A.P.P. for respondents. ..... CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND A.M. THIPSAY , JJ. DATE : 8th November, 2011 JUDGMENT : (PER JOSHI, J.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. The petitioner has challenged the intimation issued to him by the Collector, (annexure `A' page 60) stating that for the reasons recorded in the order dated 25.10.2000, the petitioner's claim was rejected. It discloses that the Collector has decided the petitioner's claim for confiscating the gold, which was transferred to the Collector, pursuant to the order passed by the Sessions Judge, for disposal in accordance with law. 3. Pursuant to the Rule, the Collector has filed affidavit in reply. At Annexure `H' to the affidavit in reply, the Collector has placed on record, a copy of order dated 25.10.2000. 4. Perused the order at Annexure `H'. It discloses following points:- 2 CRIWP56.01 (a) The matter of title of the petitioner to the molten gold believed to be made from the Gold Mohours found as Treasure Trove was being considered. (b) The matter was taken for disposal, in view of the order passed by the Collector. (c) Two notices dated 28.08.2000 and 07.09.2000 were served on the claimant for appearance on 6th and 9th September, 2000 respectively. (d) On the date and time appointed and communicated in the notice, the petitioner has not filed a reply and/or evidence in support of his claim. (e) The Collector has considered the material on record, such as panchanamas, the manner in which the gold mohours were recovered etc. (f) The Collector has passed the order holding that the petitioner has failed to prove his title to the confiscated gold, which was a molten mass-lug from the gold mohours which were found as treasure trove. 5. The petitioner has filed Rejoinder, however, has failed to answer the point as to why he did not represent before the Collector as well, on what evidence, he was able to prove that the gold mohours allegedly treasure trove, were not the substratum from which molten gold mass-lug is generated. 6. In the result, we find that the order passed by the Collector is not challenged on substantial grounds, much less sustainable. 7 In the result, Rule is required to be discharged and is, accordingly discharged. We leave the parties to bear their own costs. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.) ( A.H. JOSHI, J.) ga s/CRIWP56.01