IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2008 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1929 W.P(C).No. 6774 of 2008(F) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ABDUL NAZAR, S/O.KUNHOKE, AGED 28 YEARS, KARUTHEDATH HOUSE, PAZHAMPARAMBA, MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON SMT.S.SMITHA (PARAKKAL) RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. KODIYATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KODIYATHUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KODIYATHUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AREACODE POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.I.V. PRAMOD, R2 TO R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 6774 OF 2008 F ==================== Dated this the 10th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T In this writ petition, petitioner contends that a mini lorry bearing registration No.KL-10F/3042 has been seized by the respondents on the allegation that it was engaged in the unauthorised transportation of river sand. According to the petitioner, it was on the strength of a valid pass that he undertook the transportation. It is stated that despite all this, the lorry was seized and presently it is in the custody of the 4th respondent. It is complaining of delay in finalising the proceedings and seeking release of the truck, this writ petition has been filed. 2. In my view, since under the Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act and Rules, the 2nd respondent is vested with the power to decide on this issue, this court will not be justified in interfering with the matter at this WPC 6774/08 :2 : stage. 3. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 2nd respondent shall complete the proceedings in respect of the truck in question exercising his power under Rule 27 of the Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Rules, 2002. This shall be done by the 2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within ten days of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that it will be open to the petitioner to seek interim custody of the vehicle by making appropriate application to the 2nd respondent in which case the 2nd respondent shall consider that as well. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp