IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 2237 of 2010(D)
1. MAYA.G.KURUP, W/O.RADHAKRISHNA KURUP
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.SAKIR.K.H.
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :22/01/2010
O R D E R
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C). No.2237/2010-D
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P1 order wherein the
District Collector directed the release of the vehicle on
certain conditions. Condition No.2 therein is that the
vehicle shall not be used within the area of Adoor Taluk.
It is submitted that such a restriction is unreasonable and
against the decision of this Court in W.P.(C).
No.19926/2009. A copy of the Judgment is produced as
Ext.P2. In Ext.P2 Judgment, while considering a similar
order wherein there was a prohibition to use the vehicle,
it was held in paragraph (3) thus:-
“3. Condition No.2 does not seem to be
justified. It prevents the petitioner
from using the vehicle within the limits of
Adoor Taluk. The condition requiring the
petitioner, the owner of the vehicle, not to
use the vehicle within the jurisdiction of
the District Collector is not justified.
Accordingly, condition No.2 in Ext.P2 shall
be deleted and other conditions in Ext.P2
shall remain intact.”
W.P.(C). No.2237/2010
-:2:-
2. Similar is the position herein also. In that view
of the matter, condition No.2 in Ext.P1 order will be
deleted and the vehicle will be released on the other
conditions provided in Ext.P1.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
ms