High Court Kerala High Court

Kunji Moideen Kutty vs District Collector on 4 October, 2007

Kerala High Court
Kunji Moideen Kutty vs District Collector on 4 October, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 28209 of 2007(G)


1. KUNJI MOIDEEN KUTTY, AGED 42 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.
                       ...       Respondent

2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (RDO),

3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :04/10/2007

 O R D E R
                           ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                             --------------------------
                       W.P.(C). NO. 28209 OF 2007
                               ---------------------
                    Dated this the 4th day of October, 2007

                               J U D G M E N T

In this case, proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner

on the allegation that his vehicle was involved in unauthorised

transportation of river sand. The matter reached the District Collector, who

in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 27 of the Rules concluded

enquiry and passed Ext.P7 order. It is seen from Ext.P7 that the petitioner,

who is the registered owner, was heard in the matter and he confessed his

guilt.

2. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is

no substance in the above statement. In the light of what has been stated

in Ext.P7, I can only be guided by the contents thereof. That apart, the

petitioner has also not produced any cogent evidence to conclude

otherwise.

3. In terms of the Rules, the vehicle can be released only if the value

of the vehicle and the fine amount has been remitted by the offender. In

this case it is a Mini Lorry and the value fixed is Rs.80,000/-. In my view it

is not disproportionate to the actual value of the vehicle and hence do not

warrant interference. However, I notice that the fine amount fixed is

Rs.50,000/- and this is too disproportionate to the quantity of the offence.

Accordingly, the fine of Rs.50,000/- will stand reduced to Rs.25,000/-.

Subject to such modification, the writ petition is dismissed.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

vps

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

OP NO.8556/01

JUDGMENT

18TH SEPTEMBER, 2007

CRL.R.P.769/00

ORDER IN CRL.M.P. NO.4143/00 IN CRL.R.P.769/00

DISMISSED

13.9.07 SD/- K.R. UDAYABHANU, JUDGE

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE.