Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 29809 Ker
Judgement Date : 22 October, 2024
2024:KER:80682
W.A.No.1467/2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 30TH ASWINA, 1946
WA NO. 1467 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.10.2022 IN WP(C) NO.5441
OF 2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
RIYAS
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. KUNJUMUHAMMED, KANDATHIL, AROOKUTTY, VADUTHALA
JETY P.O., CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA - 688535
BY ADVS.
M.A.SULFIA
ABDUL JALEEL.A
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1, PIN - 695001
2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ALAPPUZHA-688 001.
3 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
POOCHACKAL POLICE STATION, PANAVALLY P.O. - 688526
4 DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY ALAPPUZHA
2024:KER:80682
W.A.No.1467/2024
2
REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, ALAPPUZHA.,
PIN - 688001
5 THE TEHSILDAR
CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-, PIN - 688524
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI V TEKCHAND, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:80682
W.A.No.1467/2024
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2024
Nitin Jamdar, C.J.
Heard Ms. M.A.Sulfia, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr. V.Tekchand, learned Senior Government Pleader.
2. The Appellant has challenged the judgment dated 14 October 2022 delivered by the learned Single Judge rejecting W.P.(C)No.5441 of 2013 filed by the Appellant. The Appellant, the owner of a Truck challenged the order of confiscation issued by the District Collector. The confiscation was resorted to since the truck owned by the Appellant was found unauthorizedly and illegally transporting river sand and the Appellant had contravened the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act and Rules framed thereunder. The case of the Appellant is of denial and that no such incident took place, whereby river sand was transported. The contention of the Appellant is that it is only a mere theory of the authorities that the truck was indulged in illegal transportation of river sand, without any evidence.
3. The learned Single Judge has examined the factual aspects in detail. The learned Single Judge noted the statements on record that the truck owned by the Appellant did not stop when the police authorities accosted it and had to be chased, and then the driver unloaded the sand on the road. The learned Single Judge found that these statements to be credible. Due procedure was followed and confiscated the goods and vehicle was produced 2024:KER:80682
before the Magistrate.
4. The learned Single Judge has reached the conclusion after assessing the evidence. We do not find that the view taken is perverse. No interference is warranted in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.
5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
Nitin Jamdar Chief Justice
Sd/-
S. Manu Judge vgd
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!