IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2011 / 29TH ASHADHA 1933 OP(C).No. 2340 of 2011(O) ------------------------- CMA.28/2011 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT (SPL.COURT), KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------------------ VINOD KUMAR K.K., S/O. KUNJAN PILLAI, KOYIKKAL HOUSE, KAROOR, MUNDACKAL P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. VILLAGE OFFICER, KURICHITHANAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARANGATTUPILLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 635. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 141. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM-686 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. SAJEEV. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(C).No. 2340 of 2011 APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT RELATING TO VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION No. KL-09W-6271. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 3.4.2011 PREPARED BY THE 1ST RESPONDET WITH RESPECT TO THE VEHICLE MENTIONED IN EXHIBIT P1. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 4.4.2011 SENT BY THE TAHSILDAR ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER No.E-9-15446/2011 DATED 7.6.2011. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.28/2011 FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT-III (SPECIAL COURT FOR HEARING SURIANELLI CASES) KOTTAYAM. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. Kp/ THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- O.P.(C) No.2340 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2011. JUDGMENT The vehicle allegedly belonging to the petitioner was seized by first respondent on April 3, 2011 for alleged violation of the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act. The order for confiscation was upheld by the District Collector, Kottayam as per Ext.P4, order dated June 7, 2011 under Section 20(1) of the said Act. Challenging Ext.P4, order, petitioner filed C.M.A.No.28 of 2011 before learned District Judge, Kottayam. Along with the appeal petitioner also moved an application for interim custody of the vehicle. But, that application is posted on August 4, 2011. Petitioner seeks a direction to the learned District Judge for early disposal of the said application. Learned counsel has submitted that since the vehicle is in the custody of the Department and is exposed to rain and sun, it is getting damaged. I have heard learned Government Pleader also. 2. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader I am inclined to allow the request. Resultantly this Original Petition is disposed of directing learned District Judge, Kottayam to dispose of the application for interim custody filed in C.M.A.No.28 of 2011 or if possible, the appeal itself, as early as possible having regard to the grievance of petitioner. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks