IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 30773 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- MOIDHEEN T.P., S/O MOHAMMED T.P., THELEERI PULPARAMBIL HOUSE,' CHERUVADI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL), KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.30773/2008 L APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 8/09/08. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE FORM (P) ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE KODIYATHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT DTD. 23/09/08. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE MEDICAL LABORATORY REPORT DTD.22/7/2008. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PRESCRIPTION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE RELIEF CLINIC, CHERUVADY DTD. 23/09/08. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 23/09/08. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 23/09/08. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 13/10/08. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss V. GIRI, J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 30773 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. By consent of parties this writ petition is taken up and disposed of. The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P7 order passed by the District Collector directing that the vehicle belonging to the petitioner allegedly involved in unauthorised transportation of river sand has been released to the petitioner, but after imposing a fine of Rs.25,000/- and further directing the petitioner to pay Rs.2,50,000/- towards the value of the vehicle. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Sathyanatha Menon submits that the order is bad in law for more than one reason. Firstly fine cannot be imposed by the District Collector, it could be imposed only by the court. Secondly transportation of sand in the vehicle was accompanied by a pass. But the petitioner could not complete the journey on account of the fact that he was suffering from pain in the kidney and he was taken to the hospital and in fact WPC.30773 /2008 2 another driver had been arranged. These facts, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner are borne out from the medical records including Ext.P3. These aspects have not been specifically dealt with by the District Collector. 2. An order directing confiscation of the vehicle on failure to pay the price cannot be passed in a casual manner. It results in a person losing custody of the vehicle and if there is explanation in that regard, such explanation may be considered. 3. In the result, the writ petition is allowed in part. Exts.P7 is set aside and the District Collector is directed to pass fresh order on the petitioner's plea for release of the vehicle, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To enable the District Collector to do so, the petitioner shall file a comprehensive representation clearly indicating the reasons as to why he was prevented from driving the vehicle at the material point of time. V. GIRI, JUDGE. Pmn/ WPC.30773 /2008 3