IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2010 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 14682 of 2010(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUKUNDAMANON,S/O.MADHAVAN NAIR,AGED 55 YEARS,MANJULA NIVAS,DESHAMANGALAM.P.O.AND VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT.(REGISTERED OWNER OF A MINI LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO. KL-02-H-8332) BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERUTHURUTHY POLICE STATION,THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,THRISSUR. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 14682 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 order passed by the District Collector in proceedings under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act and the rules thereunder, directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- as the value of the vehicle towards River Management Fund for illegal transport of river sand. The petitioner challenges both the finding regarding guilt as well as valuation. As far as the challenge against the finding regarding guilt, I find that the petitioner was heard and the petitioner has not produced any valid pass for transport of the river sand and admitted the offence. The petitioner has not chosen to challenge that finding in Ext.P1 by appropriate pleadings in the writ petition. That being so, I cannot consider that contention of the petitioner now. Therefore, the finding of guilt of the petitioner is confirmed. On the question of valuation, the learned Government Pleader could not satisfy me that a proper valuation has been conducted by the District Collector as enjoined by law, particularly in the decision in District Collector, Malapuram v. Abdul Kasim [2010 (1) KLT SN 31 (C.No.38)]. That being so, the District Collector is bound to get the vehicle valued by a proper officer. Accordingly, that part of Ext.P1 whereby the w.p.c.14682/10 2 valuation of the vehicle is fixed as Rs.1,25,000/- is quashed. The 2nd respondent-District Collector is directed to get the vehicle valued by a competent officer as directed in the above said decision. The petitioner shall pay the value so fixed as the amount payable by the petitioner towards the River Management Fund even if the said amount is higher than the amount fixed in Ext.P1. Orders in this regard shall be passed and communicated to the petitioner within three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge