IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 21ST MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 239 of 2010 ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.31884/2009 Dated 19/01/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ K.P.KABILAN, S/O.M.K.PONNAMBALAM, RESIDING AT 66-B, CAUVERY NAGAR, KULITHALAI P.O., KARUR DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2010 ALONG WITH WA NO.240/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.Raman, Ag. C.J. & Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.Nos.239 & 240 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. These writ appeals are against interim orders passed by the learned Single Judge granting interim custody of the vehicle involved in proceedings before the District Collector under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The plea of the appellants/petitioners is that Annexure A order issued by this Court in a different writ appeal should have been considered and terms thereof which are stated to be softer than those imposed as per the impugned order should have been imposed. We are not impressed. Firstly, these writ appeals as against interim orders are not maintainable because the interim order does not render a conclusive finding on any particular issue in the writ petition. W.A.Nos.239 & 240 of 2010 - 2 - Secondly, the facts and circumstances which led to Annexure A order of the Division Bench would have been totally different from the facts and circumstances of the cases in hand. We are also inclined to think that even that issue need not be looked into because interim orders and appellate orders therefrom need not necessarily result in any precedent unless it pivotally answers any question of law. 2. Under such circumstances, we find no ground to interfere with the impugned order. Writ appeals are accordingly dismissed, however, without prejudice to the right of the appellants, if any, in accordance with law, to move the learned Single Judge for varying the terms of the impugned order on any shown facts and circumstances. P.R.Raman, Ag. Chief Justice Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge vns