IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 1671 of 2011(H)
1. PRAMOD E.N., S/O.NARAYAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
... Respondent
2. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :18/01/2011
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No. 1671 of 2011 H
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner claims to be the registered owner of a
tipper lorry bearing registration No.KL-50-1574. Proceedings
under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of
Removal of Sand Act, 2001 initiated against the vehicle were
concluded by Ext.P3 order of confiscation. Aggrieved by
Ext.P3 order, petitioner has filed Ext.P4 revision, which is now
pending before the District Collector. In this writ petition,
petitioner complains of delay in the disposal of Ext.P4 and
also complains that in the meanwhile, the vehicle, which is
remaining in custody, will be deteriorated due to sun and rain.
2. If, as stated by the petitioner, Ext.P4 revision is
pending, it is necessary that the first respondent should
expeditiously conclude the proceedings. Taking note of the
grievance of the petitioner that further detention of the vehicle
would cause damage to the vehicle, it is directed that the
W.P.(C) No.1671/2011
: 2 :
petitioner to seek interim custody of the vehicle. It is clarified
that if the petitioner makes an application for interim custody
of the vehicle, the first respondent will consider the application
and pass orders thereon, applying the principles laid down in
the judgment in Shan C.T. Vs. State of Kerala [2010 (3) KHC
333].
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks
// True Copy //
P.A. To Judge