IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2010 / 9TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 25442 of 2010(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.K.THOMAS, S/O.KURIAN, AGED 52 YEARS, MUKKATH HOUSE, MITHRKARI MURI, MUTTAR VILLAGE, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.M.D.SASIKUMAR SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.DIPU JAMES RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINING AND GEOLOGY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 0 1. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA - 688 001. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 679 533. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAMANKARI POLICE STATION, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 679 533. MR.NARAYANAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.25442 of 2010 (E) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 31st day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P5 order dated 05/04/2010 passed by the District Collector exercising his powers under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and Ext.P3 consequential order. 2. Although several technical contentions have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a reading of Ext.P5 shows that it was passed fully on the strength of the materials available before the District Collector and that sample has been found to be of river sand. It is also seen that the petitioner had not produced any document legitimising either its possession or its transportation. In that view of the matter, I do not find any ground for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg