IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 36835 of 2009(Y)
1. KRISHNAN KUTTY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
For Petitioner :SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :21/12/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
---------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 36835 OF 2009
--------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009
J U D G M E N T
Heard Sri. Varghese M.Easo, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Sri. P.N.Santhosh, the learned
Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is the registered owner of a goods vehicle
bearing registration No.KL-13L 7293. The said vehicle was seized
by the second respondent on 12.12.2009 on the allegation that it
was used to transport river sand without a valid pass. A report was
thereafter submitted to the District Collector, Pathanamthitta. The
petitioner thereupon moved the District Collector by filing Ext.P2
application dated 12.12.2009 seeking interim custody of his vehicle.
The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that, till date, orders have
not been passed thereon. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a
writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the first respondent to
consider Ext.P2 application and pass orders thereon granting
interim custody of the vehicle to him expeditiously.
3. A learned single Judge of this Court has in Subramanian
v. State of Kerala (2009 (1) KLT 77) while upholding the
W.P.(C) No. 36835/09
2
constitutional validity of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and
Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001, held that the District
Collector has the power to direct release of any vehicle which is
seized and produced before him, by way of interim custody. In such
circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with the following
directions.
(i) The District Collector, Pathanamthitta, shall, within 7 days
from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this
judgment before him, issue orders granting interim custody of the
vehicle to the petitioner on such terms and conditions as he may
deem fit to impose. If the vehicle is already involved in the
commission of a similar offence or offences, it will be open to the
District Collector to decline to release the vehicle by way of interim
custody. If likewise, after interim custody is given, the vehicle is
involved in a similar offence, it will be open to the District Collector to
order immediate seizure of the vehicle notwithstanding the fact that
interim custody is given pursuant to this order.
(ii) The District Collector, Pathanamthitta, shall pass final
orders in the proceedings initiated by him within two months from the
W.P.(C) No. 36835/09
3
date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this
judgment, after notice to and affording the petitioner, a reasonable
opportunity of being heard. The District Collector shall after final
orders are passed, communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner
expeditiously. The contentions of the petitioner on the merits are
kept open.
P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE
vps