IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2008 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 12076 of 2008(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. E.P.KUTTAPPAN, S/O. PAPPAN, EDAVATHARA HOUSE, SACHIVOTHAMAPURAM POST, KURICHY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. SIBY N.CHACKO, S/O. N.J.CHACKO, NARAKATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLOM POST, NATTAKOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.KURUVILLA JACOB RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUVARPPU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK. 5. THE S.I. OF POLICE, WEST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 12076 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: APRIL 8, 2008 JUDGMENT In this writ petition, petitioners complain that the country boat belonging to the 1st petitioner has been seized on the allegation that it was engaged in unauthorised transportation of river sand and the proceedings are now pending before the 1st respondent. Complaining that final orders have not been passed, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for a declaration that the seizure itself was illegal. 2. Even according to the petitioners since final order has not been passed, I think it is premature to examine the contentions raised regarding the validity of the seizure. In my view, what is required to be done at this stage, is to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders in terms of Rule 27 of Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act and Rules, 2002. 3. In view of the above, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 1st respondent shall pass orders in terms of Rule 27 of WP(C) 12076/08 Page numbers Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act and Rules, 2002, in respect of the seizure of the country boat belonging to the 1st petitioner. Orders shall be passed within 15 days of production of a copy of this judgment. 4. Since the petitioners are complaining that even a copy of the mahazar has not been served on them, I direct that the 2nd respondent shall, on production of a copy of this judgment, furnish a copy of the mahazar to the petitioners also. 5. Petitioners are directed to produce a copy of this judgment before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-