IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 15774 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SUNIL KUMAR, S/O. JOHNSON, SUNIL BHAVAN, ARAMADA P.O., KUNNAPUZHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.C.M.STEPHEN RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR. P. NARAYANAN – GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.15774 OF 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of MAY, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's vehicle along with five other vehicles were seized on allegations of transportation of river sand, while being engaged in the process, in the 'kavalam kadavu' at Thrikkannapuram. Out of the six lorries, four were found to be filled up with river sand and the two others about to be loaded with river sand. Pursuant to the seizure, the petitioner was heard and the District Collector has passed Ext.P3 order directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.72,000/- being the value of the vehicle, towards the River Management Fund. It was also found that the very same lorry was earlier apprehended for similar violation twice and amounts were directed to be paid towards the River Management Fund in respect of those violation and this is the third time the very same vehicle was being apprehended for similar violations. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 order. According to the petitioner, the vehicle was not transporting river W.P.(c)No.15774/2010 2 sand at the time of seizure. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The finding in Ext.P3 is that the petitioner's lorry along with five other lorries was apprehended in ' kavalam kadavu' at Thrikkannapuram. Out of the six lorries, four lorries were already filled up with river sand and the petitioner's lorry and another lorry was about to be filled up river sand. The petitioner has no case that the petitioner had any documents for transporting the river sand. The only reason for the lorry to be there can only be for transportation of river sand. Therefore the vehicle was actually in the process of loading river sand for unauthorised transportation. In such circumstances, I am satisfied that the finding that the petitioner has violated the provisions of the Act and Rules is valid and proper. The District Collector had got the vehicle valued by the RTO also and the amount of Rs.72,000/- assessed as the value of the vehicle by the RTO has been directed to be paid towards the River Management Fund. I do not find any infirmity whatsoever in Ext.P3 order. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(c)No.15774/2010 3 W.P.(c)No.15774/2010 4