High Court Kerala High Court

K.Achuthan vs The State Of Kerala on 11 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
K.Achuthan vs The State Of Kerala on 11 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19181 of 2005(H)


1. K.ACHUTHAN, S/O.CHANDRAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/

4. THE DIRECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.THAMBAN

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR

 Dated :11/07/2008

 O R D E R
                K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.
                ---------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) No.19181 OF 2005
                 --------------------------------------
            Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008

                        J U D G M E N T

~~~~~~~~~~~

The petitioner is the owner of a lorry bearing registration

No.KL-14/E-2375. The said vehicle was seized by the Revenue

Divisional Officer and kept in the police station. Later, it was

released on payment of Rs.10,000/- to the River Management

Fund, as evident from Ext.P1. The petitioner submits that he

had a valid permit for transporting the sand. Even if, there is

any irregularity, the maximum fine that could be imposed on

him under the provisions of the Kerala Miner Mineral

Concessions Rule 1967 is only Rs.5,000/-. So, the respondents

may be directed to refund the amount paid as per Ext.P1.

2. The vehicle, which was seized on the allegation that

it was used for transporting river sand is liable to be

confiscated. In that event, the vehicle can be released only on

paying the value of the vehicle. In fact, by the irregular

procedure followed by the respondents, the petitioner has stood

to gain. Therefore, there is no reason for him to demur. If this

W.P.(C) No.19181/2005 2

Court quashes the collection of amount and remits the matter to

the District Collector for fresh disposal, graver consequences

may befall the petitioner. Therefore, it is unnecessary for this

Court to interfere with the impugned order, which is favourable

to the petitioner herein. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed.

(K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE)

ps