IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5899 of 2011(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- NIDEESH.P., S/O.GOVINDAN, AGED 26 YEARS, PERUMKANI, P.O,.MUCHUKUNNU, VIYYAR AMSOM, PULIYANCHERI DESOM, KOYILANDY. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.SREEJITH SRI.M.PROMODH KUMAR SRI.P.P.SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE-01. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KOYILANDY MINI CIVIL STATION, KOYILANDY-01. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: dmb P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 5899 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging Ext.P6 order passed by the 2nd respondent under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 / Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Rules, 2002 involving the vehicle seized from the petitioner. 2. The sequence of events as given in the writ petition shows that the vehicle bearing No.KL-11C-7758, which is stated as owned and driven by the petitioner, was seized by the 3rd respondent on 27.8.2008 alleging illegal transportation of river sand without a valid permit. Ext.P1 final order passed on 18.10.2008 was challenged before this Court by filing W.P(C) No.37205/2008, which culminated in Ext.P4 judgment directing the 2nd respondent to pass fresh orders as specified. Pursuant to the said verdict, the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P5 interim order on 5.1.2009 and later passed Ext.P6 final order on 19.3.2009. The petitioner is before this Court challenging Ext.P6, for the reasons stated in the writ petition. W.P.(C).No.5899 OF 2011 2 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Going by the materials on records, it is very much evident that the petitioner is trying to expose the cause of action which originally arose in the year 2008. Ext.P6 final order, pursuant to the interference made by this Court was passed as early as on 19.3.2009. Absolutely no reason, much less any acceptable version, has been stated in the writ petition, as to the inordinate delay on the part to the petitioner. This Court does not find any reason to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dmb