IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31073 of 2011(H) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ PRADEEP, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, PONNARASSERI HOUSE, CHOONDAL P.O. BY ADV. SRI.C.HARIKUMAR, SMT.V.V.ASHA. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, THRISSUR- 680 001. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/ SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, OFFICE OF RDO, THRISSUR- 680 001. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM- 680 503. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.MOHAMMED SHAH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 31073 of 2011(H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.58289/P3/2010. EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE VALID PASS FOR SAND MINING FOR THE PETITIONER AT THE TIME OF SEIZURE. EXT.P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 20.01.2011. EXT.P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION. EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 21.10.2011. EXT.P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29.10.2011. EXT.P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED 09.11.2011. EXT.P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION NO.ORDER NO.B 61821/11 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 31073 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P5 is an order passed by the District Collector exercising his powers u/s 23B of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. Aggrieved by this order the petitioner filed Ext.P8, an application for review. In this writ petition what is sought is a direction for its consideration. Power of review is not inherent but has to be expressly conferred. There is no provision in the Act referred to above conferring review power on the District Collector. Therefore Ext.P8 is not a statutory application and consequently this court will not be justified in directing its consideration. Hence this petition is only to be dismissed and I do so. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge