IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2010 / 21ST SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25066 of 2010(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAJU O., S/O. KRISHNAN, AGED 27 YEARS, NAMBALA MANJEERI, TENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER SRI.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM - 1. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, TENHIPALAM - 673 636, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.25066 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 12th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P9 order passed by the District Collector on the application filed by the petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle seized on allegations of illegal transportation of river sand, in violation of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. According to the petitioner, the conditions stipulated in Ext.P9 are not in accordance with the Full bench decision in Shan C.T. v. State of Kerala [2010 (3) KHC 333]. The petitioner, therefore seeks the following reliefs: “(i) call for the records leading to Exhibit P9 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction; (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to release the vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-07 P–9657 to the petitioner forthwith; (iii) call for the records leading to Ext.P4 order and quash the same by issuing a writ or certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. The conditions for granting interim custody of the vehicles seized on allegations of illegal transportation of river sand have been laid down by the Full Bench in the abovesaid decision. The conditions in Ext.P9 are not in terms of that decision. Therefore, Ext.P9 is illegal and therefore, quashed. The competent authority as per the Act, as it w.p.c.25066/10 2 stands today, shall reconsider the question of interim custody of the vehicle in accordance with the Full Bench decision and pass appropriate orders thereon within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. I make it clear that I have not considered the contentions on merits raised by the petitioner especially the contentions based on Ext.P7 judgment to the effect that, for attempt to transport river sand no proceedings under Section 23 can be initiated. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge