IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2009 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 38129 of 2007(L) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- YAHIA, S/O.MUHAMMAD ALI, AGED 40 YEARS, KALIYARVATTATH HOUSE, VALIYAKUNNAM AMSAM, VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. MR.DILIP MOHAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.38129/2007-L: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 20/07/2007 IN W.P.(C).NO.21438/07. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 04/08/07 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 09/08/07 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 19/11/07. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 38129 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th May, 2009. J U D G M E N T The matter arises under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. A lorry belonging to the petitioner loaded with river sand was seized under the Act on the allegation that the transportation is against the provisions of the Act and Rules. After an earlier round of litigation, the same resulted in Ext. P2 order of the District Collector, whereby it was found that the transportation was in violation of the provisions of the Act and Rules. Accordingly, the vehicle was confiscated and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 55,000/- as value of the vehicle in lieu of confiscation and he was also directed to pay Rs.25,000/- as fine. The petitioner challenges Ext. P2 and consequential orders Exts.P3 and P4. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not violated any provisions of the Act or the Rules and therefore the confiscation of the vehicle and levy of fine are unsustainable. 2. The learned Government Pleader, with the help of a counter affidavit, opposes the contentions of the petitioner. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. The petitioner himself admits that he did not possess any valid pass for transportation of the sand. He has not been able to satisfy me that such transportation of river sand was after complying with the mandatory provisions of the Act and the Rules. Therefore, I am not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioner that the transportation of the river sand was after complying with the provisions of the Act and Rules. 5. The petitioner has got another contention that as held by a Division Bench of this Court in Sanjayan v. Tahsildar, 2007(4) KLT 597, no fine can be imposed by the District Collector under the provisions of the Act in so far as such power vests exclusively with W.P.C. No. 38129/07 -: 2 :- the Magistrate, who tries an offence under the Act. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the imposition of fine is clearly illegal. Referring to the decisions of this Court in Alavi v. District Collector and others, 2007(4) KLT 473 and Moosakoya v. State of Kerala, 2008(1) KLT 538, the learned Government Pleader would argue that the District Collector has powers to impose fine also. 6. After going through those decisions, I am unable to find anything therein contrary to the decision in Sanjayan's case. That being so, going by the Division Bench decision in Sanjayan's case, imposition of fine is clearly unsustainable. Accordingly, Ext. P2 to the extent it imposes fine of Rs. 25,000/- on the petitioner is hereby set aside. However, the direction to pay Rs.55,000/- as value of the vehicle in lieu of confiscation is upheld. 7. The petitioner would submit that the petitioner had earlier paid Rs.25,000/-. If the same is correct, the petitioner shall pay the balance amount also within one month. If the petitioner does not pay the same as directed above, it would be open to the respondents to recover the same either by invoking the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner as per order dated 24-12-2007 in this writ petition or by taking coercive proceedings as warranted by law. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/