IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2009 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 11023 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUHAMMED KUTTY, S/O.ABU, AGED 60, RESIDING AT VETTUTHOTTUNGAL HOUSE, KANNATTIPPADY, VENGARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.HARISH R. MENON SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM. BY GP SRI.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).11023/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT The vehicle belonging to the petitioner's son bearing registration No.KL-55/B-2297 was seized for alleged contravention of the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The final order, Ext.P2, was passed by the District Collector finding that the vehicle was transporting river sand illegally and unauthorizedly. The defence taken by the petitioner was not accepted by the District Collector. By Ext.P2 order, petitioner was directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,50,000/-, assessed as a value of the vehicle towards the river management fund. 2. Ext.P2 was challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No.5691/2009. By Ext.P3 judgment, this Court while observing that the Court does not find any reason to assail the findings given by the District Collector, nevertheless observed that the fixation of W.P.(C).11023/2009 2 the value of the vehicle does not seem to be an adequate reason. Accordingly, Ext.P2 was set aside and the matter was remitted to the District Collector. 3. According to the petitioner, the value of the vehicle should thereafter, have been ascertained from the Motor Vehicles Department and the same could have been assigned to the vehicle enabling the District Collector to pass consequential orders in terms of Ext.P3 judgment. That was not done. District Collector proceeded to pass an order fixing the value and the same has been challenged in this writ petition. 4. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. 5. Finding of the District Collector as originally entered in Ext.P2, that the transportation of sand in the vehicle was in contravention of the provisions of W.P.(C).11023/2009 3 the Act, was not interfered with by this Court in Ext.P3 judgment. In fact, the same has been affirmed and remand was for the limited purpose of ascertaining the value of the vehicle. I find force in the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that the value of the vehicle should have, essentially in the context of the directions issued in Ext.P3, ascertained from the Motor Vehicles Department and then suitably adopted by the District Collector while passing an order. That has not been done. 6. Accordingly, Ext.P5 is set aside to the limited extent that the value of the vehicle has been fixed at Rs.3,00,000/-. District Collector shall require the competent officials from the Motor Vehicles Department to inspect the vehicle and give its value. Thereafter, he may on the said basis, fix the value of the vehicle for the purpose of Section 23 of the Act. The entire process shall be completed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this W.P.(C).11023/2009 4 judgment. In the meanwhile, if the petitioner is prepared to remit the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rs.Three Lakhs), without prejudice to his contentions, vehicle shall be released to him on him executing a bond to produce the same as and when required by the District Collector. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs