IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 32317 of 2010(L)
1. DAVID RAJ.C
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :21/10/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 32317 OF 2010 (L)
=====================
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2010
J U D G M E N T
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner complains that his Taurus
lorry bearing Regn.No.TN-21-Q-0387, 16 Ton HGV-Ashok Leyland
has been detained on the allegation that the vehicle was used for
transportation of river sand in violation of the provisions
contained in the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation
of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. According to the petitioner, the
sand was purchased from a registered dealer in Tamilnadu and
was transported on the strength of all required documents. It is
contended that, therefore the provisions of the Kerala Protection
of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 are
inapplicable and hence the proceedings are liable to be set aside.
2. However, as can be seen from the records,
proceedings initiated against the petitioner is on the allegation
that the transportation was in violation of the provisions of the
Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of
Sand Act, 2001 and if the petitioner has a case that the sand was
brought from outside the State, and that therefore the Act is
WPC No. 32317/10
:2 :
inapplicable, it is for the petitioner to appear before the Sub
Divisional Magistrate and substantiate his contentions by
adducing necessary evidence. Having regard to the pendency of
the proceedings, it will be premature for this Court to examine
the contentions raised.
3. It is seen that the petitioner has filed Ext.P12
representation seeking interim custody of the vehicle. However,
that application is made before the District Collector and
therefore cannot be ordered to be considered.
4. Be that as it may, if the petitioner is desirous of getting
the vehicle released, it will be open to the petitioner to move an
appropriate application before the Sub Divisional Magistrate
seeking interim custody of the vehicle. If such an application is
filed, it is directed that the same will be dealt with in accordance
with the provisions of the Act and applying the principles laid
down by the Full Bench of this Court in Shan C.T. v. State of
Kerala [2010(3)KHC 333].
5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment
along with a copy of the Writ Petition before the concerned
WPC No. 32317/10
:3 :
authority for appropriate action.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp