Jiyo vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 20 October, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 29583 of 2009(P)


1. JIYO, S/O.JOHN PADAMADINMEL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR.

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :20/10/2009

 O R D E R
                         P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
                   -----------------------------
                       W.P(C) No.29583 of 2009-P
                  ------------------------------
              Dated this the 20th day of October, 2009.

                              J U D G M E N T

Heard Sri.P.M.Ziraj, 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-09-S-4857. The said vehicle was seized by

the first respondent Sub Inspector of Police, on 9.10.2009, on the

allegation that it was used to transport river sand without a valid pass

and produced before the second respondent. The petitioner submits

that seeking interim custody of the vehicle he has submitted Ext.P2

representation dated 12.10.2009 before the District Collector, Thrissur.

The grievance voiced by the petitioner in this writ petition is that till date,

orders have not been passed on the request made by him in Ext.P2. In

this writ petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ in the nature of

mandamus commanding the respondents to release the vehicle to him.

3. A learned Single Judge of this Court has in Subramanian V.

State of Kerala (2009(1) KLT 77) while upholding the 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 am of the opinion that the

District Collector should have considered the request made by the

petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle and passed orders thereon.

I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

i) The District Collector shall within seven days from the date

on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment pass

orders granting interim custody of the vehicle to him on such terms and

conditions as he may deem fit to impose.

ii) The District Collector shall pass final orders in the

proceedings initiated by him under the Kerala Protection of River Banks

and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and the rules framed

thereunder within three months from such date after affording the

petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The District Collector

shall pass an order giving reasons in support of his conclusions and shall

communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner expeditiously. The

contentions of the petitioner on the merits are kept open.

Sd/-

P.N.RAVINDRAN
JUDGE

//True Copy//

PA to Judge

ab