IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29416 of 2011(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- JIBEESH, S/O.PARAN, AGED 40 YEARS, PANICKASSERI HOUSE, PORKKULAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676505. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISION OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676101. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PONNANI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 679577. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASHREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.29416/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1. TRUE COPY OF PASS DATED 25/1/2011. EXHIBIT-P2. TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 2/4/2011 OF 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P3. TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16/7/11 OF 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P4. TRUE COPY OF CMA NO.34/11 DATED 29/08/2011. EXHIBIT-P5. TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT FILE WITH APPEAL. EXHIBIT-P6. TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 10/10/2011. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 29416 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 9th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be registered owner of a tipper lorry bearing Regn.No.KL-8V 3248. The 3rd respondent seized the vehicle on 25/1/11 alleging violation of the provisions contained in the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. Proceedings continued before the 2nd respondent and culminated in Ext.P2 order. That order was confirmed by the District Collector in Ext.P3 revisional order. Aggrieved by the above, petitioner has filed appeal before the District Court invoking the powers under Section 23C of the Act and the CMA has been registered as CMA 34/11. It is stated that along with the CMA, he has also filed Ext.P5 application for giving the vehicle on interim custody basis. Neither the CMA nor the application for interim custody have been considered and complaining of delay in the matter, the writ petition is filed. Taking note of the aforesaid grievance and without expressing anything on the merits, the writ petition will stand disposed of directing that, on the production of a copy of this WPC No. 29416/11 :2 : judgment, the District Court, Manjeri will expeditiously consider the application filed by the petitioner along with CMA 34/11 for interim custody of the vehicle in question. It is directed that, if the court is of the opinion that the vehicle could be given on interim custody, it will also be open to the Court to impose such conditions as it deems fit applying the principles laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Shan C.T. v. State of Kerala [2010 (3) KHC 333]. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp