IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 27TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4525 of 2010(M) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. UNNIKRISHNAN K.K., AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. KUTTAN, KARUKAYIL, THEKKOOTTU, VAZHUKKUMPARA, CHUVANNAMANNU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. SUDHEESH, S/O. NARAYANA PILLAI, MANGALAI, DEVICODE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEECHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.4525 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT The first petitioner is the owner in possession of 2007 Model Ashok Leyland Multi Axle Lorry, bearing registration No.TN-75-3376 as per a Sale Agreement dated 30/12/2009 between the first petitioner and the second petitioner, who is the registered owner of the vehicle. They are mainly aggrieved proceedings for confiscation initiated by the second respondent District Collector alleging illegal transportation of river sand. 2. According to the petitioners, the first petitioner transported one load of sand on behalf of Sri.Mahalakshmi Traders, Muthalamadda, Palakkad which is a registered dealer of sand at Kerala having Sales Tax Registration. It is averred in paragraph '2' that the sand was purchased as a second sale from Sudharesan & Co., Ganeshapuram, Puliyoor.P.O., Karoor, Tamil Nadu who is conducting business as per the order of Madras High Court having its stock place at Avoor, Musari Taluk. They purchased the sand from PWD of Tamil Nadu and is doing second sale as per the orders of the Madras High Court. 3. According to the petitioner transaction of sand is perfectly legal and valid. Exhibit P3 and P3(a) are the copies of W.P.(C)No.4525 of 2010 2 cash bill and Exhibit P4 is the copy of Retail Invoice No.3280 dated 8/1/2010. 4. By relying on Ext.P5 it is contended that the petitioner's vehicle was carrying sand from Tamil Nadu to Kerala after remitting the statutory advance tax payable to the Kerala Government. The lorry was seized by the Sub Inspector of Peechi Police Station under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. It is the case of the petitioner that even though all the documents were shown to the Sub Inspector of Police, the vehicle was taken into custody and he forwarded a report and vehicle to the District Collector regarding the seizure of the vehicle. 5. Various documents have been produced to show that as per the Government Policy itself, as evidenced from Ext.P10, import of sand from other States as well as from other Countries will be encouraged. Kerala State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd is authorised to import sand from other States without prejudice to the open market import of sand by private operators. The procedure for import will be simplified and free movement of sand shall be facilitated. It is averred that in other W.P.(C)No.4525 of 2010 3 Districts the District Collectors have been releasing vehicles which have been seized of by the Police or other authorities on finding that the documents support transportation of sand from other States. Exts.P12 to P14 and P18 to P20 are produced in support of the above plea. My attention was also drawn to Ext.P11 copy of the minutes of the Cabinet Sub Committee held on 6/1/2010 wherein item 11 shows that the restriction with regard to import of sand to various places have been abolished and that action will be taken against those who are not implementing the said decision. 6. The question is whether the river sand is transported from Tamil Nadu. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the sand is actually purchased from Kerala itself and therefore the matter requires due enquiry. In that view of the matter there will be a direction to the District Collector to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 and P17 applications seeking interim custody of vehicle and with notice of petitioner and the dealer namely SriMahalakshmi Traders. There will be a further direction to the District Collector to pass such orders within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt W.P.(C)No.4525 of 2010 4 of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of this writ petition along with a copy of this judgment before the District Collector for compliance. Final orders in the matter will be passed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after hearing all parties. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE skj