IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31175 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BASHEER P.U., S/O. UMMER, AGED 58 YEARS, POKKAKKILATH HOUSE, CHENTRAPPINNI P.O., EDATHIRUTHY VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKOM POLICE STATION. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR DIST. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ------------------- W.P.(C).31175/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT The conditions imposed by the District Collector, Thrissur, in Ext.P3 order dated 12.10.2009 while granting interim custody of the petitioner's vehicle to him are under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The petitioner's vehicle was seized and produced before the District Collector, Thrissur, on 25.6.2009 on the allegation that it was used to transport river sand without a valid pass. The petitioner thereupon, moved the District Collector seeking interim custody of his vehicle. When the said request was not granted, he filed W.P(C).24739 of 2009 in this Court. By Ext.P2 judgment delivered on 27.8.2009, a learned single Judge of this Court directed the District Collector to consider the petitioner's application for interim custody and pass orders thereon. This Court also directed the District Collector to pass final orders in the matter expeditiously. Pursuant to Ext.P2 judgment, the petitioner appeared before the District Collector on 7.10.2009 and he was heard. He contended that what was carried in his vehicle W.P.(C).31175/09 2 was not river sand but quarry waste. In view of the said contention District Collector directed the Geologist, Thrissur, to examine the goods and furnish a report within three weeks. He also granted interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner on the petitioner depositing the sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as security with two solvent sureties for the like sum. He also imposed certain other conditions. The petitioner challenges the condition imposed by the District Collector that he should remit the sum of Rs.1,75,000/- being 25% of the value fixed for the vehicle by the Sub Regional Transport Officer. He contends that the conditions imposed by the District Collector are onerous condition and that the District Collector has virtually denied interim custody to him. 3. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In my opinion, the condition imposed by the District Collector that the petitioner should remit the sum of Rs.1,75,000/- in cash and also furnish two solvent sureties for the like sum besides complying with other conditions is too onerous a condition. The District Collector is yet to decide whether the sand carried in the petitioner's W.P.(C).31175/09 3 vehicle is river sand. In such circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with the direction that in the event of the petitioner depositing an amount of Rs.50,000/- and furnishing bank guarantee for the balance amount of Rs.1,25,000/- in favour of the District Collector, Thrissur, the District Collector, shall release the petitioner's vehicle by way of interim custody. The other conditions stipulated in Ext.P3 except the condition regarding deposit of money and furnishing two solvent sureties, shall continue to operate. The District Collector shall, after the report of the Geologist is received, furnish a copy thereof to the petitioner and pass final orders in the matter expeditiously and in any event, within one month from the date of receipt of the report of the Geologist. Needless to say, the petitioner shall also be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge mrcs