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. 14718 of 2010(L) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SANDEEP T.V., S/O. VASUDEVAN, AGED 30 YEARS, DRIVER, THAYYIL HOUSE, PADINJARE VEMBALLUR P.O., KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR, (REGISTERED OWNER OF A MINI LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-18-A-5987). BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKOM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 14718 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 order passed by the District Collector directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- being the value of the vehicle seized, towards River Management Fund, on a finding that the petitioner has used the vehicle for illegal transportation of river sand in violation of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 & Rules. The petitioner's contention is that the consignment was supported by a valid pass which has been produced by the petitioner as Ext.P1. Petitioner therefore submits that Ext.P2 order without reference Ext.P1 is unsustainable. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. He points out that as found by the District Collector, Ext.P1 is a pass for transportation of ordinary sand and in Ext.P2, the District Collector had got the sand examined by W.P.(C)No. 14718 of 2010 2 the Geologist who reported that the same is of 'riverine origin'. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that no sample had been taken by the District Collector and no report of the Geologist has been obtained in respect thereof. The learned Government Pleader points out that there is no such contention in the writ petition. 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 5. As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader the petitioner has not chosen to make any averment to the effect that no examination of sand was got done by the Geologist as stated in Ext.P2 order. Without raising appropriate pleadings in the writ petition the petitioner cannot challenge Ext.P2 order on that ground. That being so, the contention raised by the petitioner cannot be countenanced. The District Collector found that the sand is river sand which has not been disputed by the petitioner. Admittedly Ext.P1 is a pass for transporting ordinary sand W.P.(C)No. 14718 of 2010 3 and not river sand. That being so, clearly the petitioner had been transporting river sand illegally as found by the District Collector. The vehicle has been got valued by the Joint Regional Transport Officer, which amount only has been directed to be paid towards River Management Fund, which is perfectly in accord with the Act and Rules. Therefore there is no infirmity whatsoever in Ext.P2 order. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/