Mohammed Anas vs The District Collector on 1 July, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 20496 of 2010(J)


1. MOHAMMED ANAS, S/O.YOOSAF,AGED 27
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM .
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ABRAHAM THOMAS (PUTHURAN)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :01/07/2010

 O R D E R
                       S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  W.P.(C)No.20496 of 2010
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
             Dated this the 1st day of July, 2010

                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order passed by the

District Collector, Malappuram. That order was passed by

the District Collector under the provisions of the Kerala

Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of

Sand Act, 2001 & Rules. In Ext.P5 the District Collector

found that the petitioner has transported river sand illegally

in violation of the Act and Rules by using the vehicle

involved. Therefore the District Collector directed the

petitioner to pay Rs.5 lakhs which was the value fixed by

the Ponnani Joint Regional Transport Officer for the vehicle,

to the River Management Fund.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that, the finding that the vehicle is used for illegal

transportation of river sand is unsustainable. He further

W.P.(C)No.20496 of 2010
-2-

submits that, the valuation of the vehicle is exorbitant and

does not represent the actual value of the vehicle.

3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader

also. He argues in support of the Ext.P5 order, on the basis

of the findings of the Ext.P5 order.

4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.

On a reading of Ext.P5, I find that, the vehicle in question

was seized with sand therein. On 22.01.2010, when the

Ponnani Motor Vehicle Inspector stopped the vehicle for

inspection, those in the vehicle ran away abandoning the

vehicle. Therefore the Joint R.T.O., Ponnani, informed this

matter to the Tahsildar, Ponnani, and pursuant thereto, the

Special Squad formed for preventing unauthorized

transport of river sand took custody of the vehicle and

entrusted with the police station after preparing a seizure

mahazar. It is also stated in Ext.P5 that at the time of

hearing, the petitioner admitted that at the time of

transportation of the sand the petitioner did not have the

required pass for such transportation and therefore the

W.P.(C)No.20496 of 2010
-3-

vehicle may be released after realising a small fine.

Petitioner could not satisfy me that the findings in Ext.P5

order are in anyway perverse or unsustainable. As such

there is no reason to interfere with the findings of the

District Collector that the petitioner had used the vehicle

for unauthorized transportation of river sand. From Ext.P5

order it is evident that the vehicle was valued by the Joint

Regional Transport Officer, Ponnani, who is a competent

officer to value the vehicle. Petitioner has not been able to

satisfy me that, that valuation is in anyway exorbitant or

unreasonable by producing any material in support of that

contention. In the above circumstances, I do not find any

infirmity in Ext.P5 order. Accordingly the writ petition is

dismissed.

S. SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE

shg/