Moideenkutty vs The Tahsildar on 26 March, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 10382 of 2007(J)


1. MOIDEENKUTTY, S/O.ABU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE TAHSILDAR, ERANAD.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

4. THE OORNGATTIRI GRAMA PANCHAYAT,

5. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :26/03/2007

 O R D E R
                                      PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

                                    --------------------------------------

                                     W.P.(C) No.10382 of 2007

                                    --------------------------------------

                                        DT. MARCH 26, 2007


                                              JUDGMENT

Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. Heard both

sides.

2. Since the 2nd respondent is the adjudicating authority and since the

adjudication is apparently going on, this writ petition will stand disposed of at this stage

with the following directions:-

The 2nd respondent will finalise the adjudication proceedings at his earliest and,

at any rate, within four months of receiving copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile if

the petitioner prefers an application before the 2nd respondent for immediate release of

his vehicle having registration No.KL 7M 6651 and the sand pending adjudication before

the 2nd respondent, the 2nd respondent will pass early orders on the same, that is, within

seven days of registration of the interlocutory application. Decision will be taken by the

2nd respondent on that application for interim reliefs taking into account the judgment of

this court reported in Moosakoya v. State of Kerala – 2005 (4) KLT 331 and also the

judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Sunderbai Ambalal Desai v. State of

Gujarat – SC 2003 (2) KLT 1089 and any other judicial pronouncement which may be

cited by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent in support of his application. As far as

possible the District Collector will take note of the conditions which used to be imposed

by this court while passing interim orders of release of vehicles involved in similar cases

pending adjudication by the District Collector.

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE.