IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 1939 of 2009(E)
1. MOIDEEN.T.P., S/O.MOHAMMED.T.P.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL)
For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :19/01/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
==============
W.P.(C) NO. 1939 OF 2009 (E)
====================
Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P10.
2. Petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing
Regn.NoKL57A-1545. The vehicle was seized on 23/9/2008 on the
allegation that it was engaged in the unauthorised transportation of river
sand. Order was passed against the petitioner. That was challenged
before this Court in WP(C) No.30773/08 and the matter was directed to be
reconsidered by judgment dated 17/11/2008.
3. It was accordingly that the matter was reconsidered by the
District Collector, after affording the petitioner an opportunity to adduce
his evidence. Ext.P10 order shows that the petitioner’s contentions have all
been adverted to. District Collector has even referred to and appreciated
the evidence tendered by the Doctor. A reading of Ext.P10 does not give
an impression that the order is perverse for any reason. Therefore,
conclusions in Ext.P10 do not call for any interference in a proceedings
under Article 226.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner then complains about the
value of the vehicle fixed. Learned Government Pleader assures that the
WPC 1939/08
:2 :
value has been fixed on the basis of the valuation done by the officers of
the Motor Vehicles Department. In such circumstances, I am not
persuaded to interfere.
Writ petition fails and is dismissed.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp