IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2011 / 26TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21098 of 2011(J) ----------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- 1. MANOJKUMAR N.R, PROPRIETOR, N.R.M ENTERPRISES, 5/507 (9/855) , PARACKALCHALLA, GOVINDAPURAM POST, KAMBRATHCHALLA, MUTHALAMADA, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. NOW RESIDING AT : NADUMURI HOUSE, GOVINDAPURAM POST, MUTHALAMADA, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. RAMAMURTHI P, S/O.PALANIAPPAN, NO.7, RCC, 206-261, S.G MUTT ROAD, CHAMRAJ P, E.T., BANGALORE- 560 018, KARNATAKA, NOW RESIDING AT: 8/89, MUTHUGAPATTY P.O, SOUTH STREET, MUTHUGAPATTY, NAMACKAL DISTRICT,TAMILNADU, PIN 637 405. BY ADVS. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI. LIJU M.P. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALATHUR POLICE STATION PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 001. 3. THE GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINIG & GEOLOGY, TOWN BUS STAND COMPLEX, PALAKKAD- 678 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 21098 of 2011(J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE ON 26.12.2009. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER ISSUED BY THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED UNDER KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX RULES. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26.07.2011. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE RETAIL INVOICE ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8 : COPY OF THE RC BOOK IN RESPECT OF THE VEHICLE KA-01-AD 2434. EXT.P9 : COPY OF THE INSURANCE POLICY IN RESPECT OF THE VEHICLE. EXT.P10 : COPY OF THE NATIONAL PERMIT. EXT.P11 : COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 29.07.2011. EXT.P12 : COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO RESPONDENT NO.1. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 21098 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August , 2011 J U D G M E N T 2nd petitioner is the registered owner of a lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-01-AD-2434. 2. According to the 2nd petitioner, the first petitioner hired the lorry and transported weathered rock sand from his unit on the strength on Exts.P1 to P6. It is stated, while so, the 2nd respondent seized the vehicle on 28.7.2011 as per Ext.P11 mahazar and produced the lorry before the first respondent. 3. The case of the petitioners is that neither Ext.P11 nor Ext.P12, discloses any offence against the petitioners and that the transportation on the strength of Exts.P1 to P6 was fully legitimate and that no interference by the authorities were warranted. W.P.(C) No. 21098 OF 2011 :2 : 4. The case was adjourned for instructions of the Government Pleader and it is submitted that seizure of the vehicle was for violation of the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. If as stated by the learned Government Pleader, seizure is for violation of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, adjudication cannot be done by the first respondent before whom this vehicle is now produced and the 2nd respondent ought to have produced the vehicle before the jurisdictional Magistrate. 5. As far as the submissions of the 2nd petitioner that transportation being done on the strength of Exts.P1 to P6, there is no illegality warranting seizure of the vehicle, this court is not in a position to act upon the said submission and grant relief to the petitioner. This is for the reason that to decide the claim of the petitioner a factual adjudication is necessary and such an adjudication is possible only by the statutory authorities who are to exercise their powers under the Mines W.P.(C) No. 21098 OF 2011 :3 : and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and not by a writ petition. 6. In such circumstances and taking note of the submissions of the learned Government Pleader I direct that on production of a copy of this judgment, the 2nd respondent will ensure that the vehicle is produced before the concerned Magistrate. Once the vehicle is produced, it will be open to the petitioner to seek interim custody of the vehicle and the learned Magistrate will pass orders thereon as expeditiously as possible at any rate within 7 days thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge