IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2011 / 25TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26731 of 2011(N) ------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- UMMER, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.YOOSUF, KOLANI VEEDU, AGALI. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD-678 001. 2. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, OTTAPPALAM - 679101. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AGALI - 678581. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 26731 of 2011(N) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.J:5476/2011 DATED 23.09.2011 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 03.10.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 03.10.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.LRG3-2011/2655/9 DATED 19.07.2011 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 26731 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be the registered owner of a lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-10/F-9776. On the allegation of illegal transportation of river sand, in violation of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001, proceedings were initiated and Ext.P1 order was passed by the 2nd respondent holding that the petitioner's vehicle is liable for confiscation and that the petitioner can reclaim the vehicle by paying the full value of the vehicle. Aggrieved by the said decision the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 representation along with Ext.P3 application u/s 23(B) of the Act, seeking interim custody of the vehicle. On that orders have not been passed and that led the petitioner to file this writ petition. W.P.(C) No. 26731 OF 2011 :2 : 2. The learned counsel also refers to Ext.P4, order passed by the District Collector allowing him to compound of similar offences. From the pleadings itself it is obvious that the revision filed by the petitioner is pending consideration before the first respondent. Therefore it is for the first respondent to consider the said revision and pass final orders with notice to the petitioner and as expeditiously as possible. Necessarily, while the matter is considered Ext.P4 order will also be duly adverted to. 3. However, pending disposal of the matter, confiscation proceedings of the above said vehicle should be kept in abeyance. 4. It is also directed that in the meanwhile if the petitioner is desirous of obtaining interim custody of the vehicle, it will be open to the petitioner to seek orders on Ext.P3 by making an appropriate application before the concerned authority and on production of a copy of this judgment, the concerned authority will consider the application without delay and pass orders thereon, W.P.(C) No. 26731 OF 2011 :3 : applying the principles laid down in the Full Bench decision of this Court in Shan C.T. v. State of Kerala [2010(3)KHC 333]. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge