IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2010 / 22ND SRAVANA 1932 WA.No. 1326 of 2010 -------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.19149/2010 Dated 21/06/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------- MOHAMMED SAKEER.K, S/O.MAHIN.K, SHAFEEK MANZIL, BEVINJA P.O., THEKKIL FERRI, KAZARAGODU. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE DEPARTMENT), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR, CIVIL STATION, KANNUR. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No.1326 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 13th day of August 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Appellant's vehicle was seized by the police while it was allegedly engaged in illegal transportation of sand. However, the appellant had a definite case that the transportation was not illegal but was on a valid permit (Ext.P3) issued by the competent authority. The vehicle was admittedly seized on April 9, 2010. It is now lying exposed to sun and rain. 2. The grievance of the appellant is that the District Collector/ respondent No.2, before whom the matter is now pending, is not taking a final decision in the matter with expedition. Therefore, the petitioner approached the learned Single Judge under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other appropriate writ or direction to the District Collector to dispose of the representation submitted by the appellant in this regard expeditiously. But the learned Single Judge, keeping in view the fact that the vehicle has been remaining idle since April 2010, ordered its release to the appellant on certain conditions. The above judgment is impugned in this appeal. 3. The other grievance of the appellant is that there is no justification for refusal of the request made by him before the District Collector to release the vehicle to him. He invites our attention to Annexure-I order passed by respondent No.2 in respect of another vehicle which was seized by the W.A.No.1326 OF 2010 :: 2 :: authorities in similar circumstances. We do not propose to express any opinion on the above contention raised by the appellant. It will be open to the appellant to raise the above issue before respondent No.2 at the appropriate stage. Learned counsel submits that the appellant will be satisfied, if respondent No.2/District Collector is directed to take a final decision in the matter without any further delay. Learned Government Pleader submits that the issue will be addressed at the earliest. In that view of the matter, the writ appeal is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/District Collector, to complete the process of adjudication relating to the seizure of the vehicle belonging to the appellant bearing Regn.No.KL-04-V-2361 which is involved in Crime No.139/10 of Pariyaram Police Station. Respondent No.2 shall ensure that a final decision is taken in the matter after hearing the parties as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE jes