Kerala High Court
Manoharan K vs The District Collector on 24 June, 2022
WP(C) NO. 7778 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 7778 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:
MANOHARAN K
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O. ANANTHAN, 'PRARTHANA', KAVIYUR, CHOKLI, PIN-
670 672, KANNUR DISTRICT
BY ADVS.
M.SASINDRAN
S.SHYAM KUMAR
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
KANNUR, COLLECTORATE ROAD, THAVAKKARA, KANNUR,PIN-
670 002
2 THE SUB COLLECTOR/REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670 101
3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
NEW MAHE POLICE STATION, NEW MAHE, KANNUR
DISTRICT,PIN-673 311
4 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 7778 OF 2022 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C.) No. 7778 of 2022
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ order to
quash Ext P8;
ii) declare that levelling the unnotified land would not
amount to violation of Section 27A of the Act and that the
provision is applicable only when the change of nature of
unnotified land is required in the revenue records for
carrying out construction activities in the property;
iii) Command the first respondent to release the vehicle
No.KL-58-Z-5722 to the petitioner forthwith without
insisting for any payment;
iv) command the first respondent to pay an amount of
Rs.5 lakhs as compensation for the delay in issuing orders
as directed in Ext P4;
v) award cost to the petitioner;
vi) issue any other writ order or direction as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case." [SIC]
2. The petitioner is the owner of a TATA Hitachi Earth
Mover. In June 2021, one Raghavan Master hired the vehicle
for levelling his garden land. Admittedly, there were coconut
trees and arecanut trees of more than 30 years in that land. It
is the case of the petitioner that the property is not included
in the Data Bank prepared under the Kerala Conservation of
Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (for short the "Act,
2008"). The vehicle of the petitioner was seized by the Police
from the residence of the petitioner alleging that it was used
for the work in the abovesaid property. Ext.P2 is the mahazar.
It is the case of the petitioner that since it is a garden land,
there cannot be any offence under the Act, 2008. The
petitioner submitted Ext.P3 application for release of the
vehicle. When there was delay, the petitioner approached this
Court and this Court as per Ext.P4 judgment dated 28.6.2021
directed the District Collector to consider the request for
releasing the vehicle within three weeks after getting a
report from the Police. The Police submitted report dated
19.7.2021 and in spite of that, the 1st respondent prolonged
the matter and ultimately issued Ext.P8 order dated 2.2.2022
ordering to pay an amount of Rs.15,08,000/- as fine for
getting release of the vehicle on the allegation that there is
violation of Sec.27A of the Act, 2008. Aggrieved by the same,
this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Government Pleader.
4. It is an admitted fact that Ext.P8 is an appealable
order. The grievance of the petitioner is that the vehicle is
now parked in the premises of the office of 3 rd respondent and
it is the only source of income to the petitioner. If the vehicle
is indefinitely parked in the Police Station premises, it will be
ruined. Therefore, the counsel submitted that the vehicle may
be released on any condition and the petitioner is ready to
challenge Ext.P8 order before the appellate authority and the
release can be subject to the final decision in Ext.P8 order. I
think there is some force in the argument of the counsel for
the petitioner. Moreover, even though this Court directed as
per Ext.P4 judgment to consider the question of release of the
vehicle on 28.6.2021, Ext.P8 order was passed only on
2.2.2022. During that period also, the vehicle was parked in
the Police Station premises. Therefore, the vehicle can be
released to the petitioner on executing a bond with
immovable property. There can be a time limit also for filing
the appeal before the appellate authority with delay
condonation petition. The appellate authority will consider
the delay condonation petition, in the light of the fact that
this writ petition is pending before this Court.
Therefore this writ petition is disposed of with the
following directions :
(1) TATA Hitachi Earth Mover bearing Regn.No. KL-58-
Z 5722 will be released to the petitioner on executing a
bond for Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only)
with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the releasing officer. I make it clear that
the petitioner need to produce only the bond offering
immovable property.
(2) The petitioner is free to challenge Ext.P8 order as
per Sec.21 of the Act, 2008 before the appellate
authority within three weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this judgment, along with a delay condonation
petition.
(3) If such an appeal with delay condonation petition is
received by the appellate authority, the same will be
considered in accordance to law and pass appropriate
orders. The pendency of this writ petition before this
Court from 8.3.2022 also will be considered by the court
below, while considering the delay condonation petition.
(4) The release of the vehicle by this Court will be
subject to the final decision in the appeal to be filed
above. If no appeal is filed as directed above, the
respondents can proceed with confiscation in
accordance to law.
SD/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
SKS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7778/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION
CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE KL-58-Z-5722
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED
09.06.2021
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
11.06.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE SUB COLLECTOR
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
28.6.2021 IN WPC NO.12753 OF 2021
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACTS FROM
THE NOTE FILE OF THE RESPECTIVE FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT
OBTAINED FROM THE PETITIONER UNDER THE
RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT
NO.RDOTLY/164/2021-K DATED 09.08.2021
SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.KBNM-09/21-
22 DATED 02.09.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE
AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, BEFORE THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.DCKNR/6016/2021-L6 DATED 02.02.2022
