IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 16793 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ NAZAR MATTATH S/O.MAMMALI, AGED 32 MATTATH HOUSE, P.O. KARIPPOL, MALAPPURAM DT. (RC OWNER OF THE VEHICEL KL-10-Q-3096) REP.BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SHARAFUDHEEN, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 30 YRS.MALEDATHVALAPPIL HOUSE, ATHAVANAD DESOM, KARIPPOL P.O. MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. MR. SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM. 2. TAHSILDAR, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DT. 3. S.I.OF POLICE, KUTTIPPURAM POLICE STATION, KUTTIPPURAM, MALAPPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kkms/ WP(C).No. 16793 of 2009(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER DATED 23.04.2009 IN P5-13052/09 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE EARLIER FINAL ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN P-5/26112/08 DATED 04.09.2008. P3: COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 20.05.2009 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE kkms/ V.GIRI, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = W.P.(C). No. 16793 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th day of August 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner is a registered owner of mini lorry bearing Reg. No. KL-10-Q-3096. The said vehicle was seized by the second respondent on 27.02.2009, alleging illicit transportation of river sand. The issue was thereafter considered by the first respondent, District Collector who passed Ext.P1 order directing the petitioner to remit an amount of Rs. 1,25,000/-. The same is challenged in this writ petition. 2. I have perused the files relating to Ext.P1, which has been produced before me by the learned Government Pleader. I have also heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not heard before Ext.P1 order. He further contends that the value of the vehicle was fixed without any guidelines. 4. Ext.P1 order and files shows that a notice of hearing was sent to the petitioner. This would have been normally sufficient. But the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the W.P.(C). No. 16793 OF 2009 2 petitioner is now working outside the State and is represented by the Power of Attorney holder. It is therefore that he was not in a position to appear before the District Collector. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that interest of justice would be met if the petitioner is given an opportunity to urge his contentions before the District Collector through his Power of Attorney holder. In such circumstances, the District Collector may reconsider the issue. Accordingly, Ext.P1 is set aside. The Power of Attorney holder of the petitioner shall appear before the District Collector along with written objections against the seizure of the vehicle on 27.08.2009 and thereafter on such date as the District Collector may conduct hearing. A fresh order shall be passed after considering such objections also within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI) JUDGE kkms/