Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 11309 Ker
Judgement Date : 2 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 5215 OF 2013
PETITIONER:
SHANAVAS K.,AGED 30 YEARS.
S/O.LAKSHMANAN, KOMMARATH HOUSE,
P.O., PADINYARRAKARA, TIRUR TALUK,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
MALAPPURAM - 676 505.
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE TIRUR
TIRUR P.O.,
MALAPPURAM 676 101.
3 THE SECRETARY PALLIVALPPU-PURATHUR MATHSYA
THOZHILALI VIKASAAN KSHEMA CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETY NO.F(M)7.
BY SRI. B. UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL - SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.5215 of 2013
2
MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,J
------------
WP(C)No. 5215 of 2013
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----
Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2022
JUDGMENT
The writ petitioner challenges the seizure of his vehicle
bearing registration No. KL 08 E 4644 on 17.10.2012 by the
second respondent. He submits that he had Ext.P3 valid pass
issued by the third respondent to transport the port sand and
alleges the seizure to be illegal and without authority.
2. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit
stating that the Mini Lorry owned by the petitioner was
intercepted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Tirur on 29.10.2012 at
4 a.m. while engaged in illegal transportation of river sand. The
statement further says the seizure was at 4 a.m. in the early
morning on 29.10.2012 and it was not the time allowed under any
valid pass. Since the vehicle was used for illegal transportation of
river sand, orders were issued to confiscate the vehicle under Rule
27(3) of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of
Removal of Sand Act, 2001, which was then in force.
3. On admission, an interim order was passed on WP(C).No.5215 of 2013
25.02.2013 granting interim custody of the vehicle to the
petitioner on conditions that he deposit 50% of the amount
covered by Ext.P6 and also furnishes security for the balance
amount either by way of immovable property to the satisfaction of
the respondents or by a bank guarantee also giving an
undertaking that the vehicle will not be alienated or will pursue
any action so as to reduce the value of the vehicle during the
pendency of the proceedings.
4. Since the vehicle has been released and more than
nine years have elapsed, the writ petition is disposed of directing
the first respondent to hear the petitioner and consider the
legality of the seizure after affording an opportunity of the
petitioner as well any affected parties/necessary parties, if any, for
such adjudication. The first respondent-District Collector will do
the above within an outer time limit of three months from today.
Depending on the orders to be passed as directed above, the
validity of the seizure and further steps to be pursued will be
decided.
Writ petition is disposed as above.
Sd/-MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,JUDGE
dlK 1.12.2022 WP(C).No.5215 of 2013
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5215/2010
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RC PARTICULARS OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL 08 E
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PASS ISSUED BY THE PALLIVALAPPU PARATHUR MATHSYA THOZHILALI VIKASANA KSHEMA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENATION DATED 18.10.2012 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
WP(C)NO.25352 OF 2012
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2013
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!