https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776377 The HC held that the petitioner, acting under Section 23A of the Sand Act, 2001, exercised quasi-judicial powers in ordering confiscation of vehicles used for illegal transportation. Applying the test from the SC in Jaswant Sugar Mills, the court found that the petitioner's order affected civil rights, involved procedural safeguards, and was subject to statutory revision and appeal, thus qualifying as quasi-judicial. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to protection under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985. The FIR alleging illegal exercise of power and collusion was held unsustainable, and the petition was allowed. en-us Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Aug 2025 08:48:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776377 The HC held that the petitioner, acting under Section 23A of the Sand Act, 2001, exercised quasi-judicial powers in ordering confiscation of vehicles used for illegal transportation. Applying the test from the SC in Jaswant Sugar Mills, the court found that the petitioner's order affected civil rights, involved procedural safeguards, and was subject to statutory revision and appeal, thus qualifying as quasi-judicial. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to protection under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985. The FIR alleging illegal exercise of power and collusion was held unsustainable, and the petition was allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776377