IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9038 of 2010(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SHARAFUDHEEN,S/O.MOYINKUTTY, 296, KAKKATHODI,8, URANGATTIRI, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AREEKODE POLICE STATION. 3. JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT, COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.9038 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner’s vehicle was seized by the Sub Inspector of Police, alleging illegal transportation of river sand on 21/1/2010. The vehicle is a lorry bearing registration No.KL-05J-1312. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order by which for releasing it by way of interim custody a condition is prescribed directing deposit Rs.1,50,000/-. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a reading of order evidently shows that the District Collector passed the same without getting proper valuation of the vehicle by the Assistant Executive Engineer (Mechanical) PWD or the Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector. 2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that on a reasonable assessment the value was fixed as Rs.3,00,000/-, even though, valuation certificate could not be obtained. Ext.P2 will therefore stand set aside. District Collector will pass appropriate orders within a period of ten days after getting valuation certificate from the Assistant Executive Engineer(Mechanical) PWD or the Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector who on a requisition by the District Collector will W.P.(C)No.9038 of 2010 2 immediately furnish the valuation of the vehicle for enabling the District Collector to pass appropriate orders. In fact the petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C) No.3927/2010 seeking for a direction to grant interim custody of the vehicle. Apart from the fixation of value of the vehicle, on other reasons also the order cannot be supported. Condition Nos.1 and 2 will deprive the petitioner of the use of the vehicle by a valid pass, and for other purposes within Perinthalmanna Taluk, till the action is finalised. Such conditions cannot be supported as the same will restrict the right to carry on the business and avocation. Hence such conditions will not be imposed while passing a fresh order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE skj