IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 31885 of 2009(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SHRI REJI ANTONY,TOOMULLIL HOUSE, VANNAPURAM.PO.,THODUPUZHA,IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.R.MAYAKRISHNAN, MR.MATHEW K.VARGHESE. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER (FORESTS) MR.K. SANIL KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 31885 of 2009-E - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of a mini lorry bearing registration No.5/B 8173. The respondent initiated proceedings under the Forest Act against the vehicle for alleged involvement in illicit transportation of forest goods. During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner filed O.P.No.18346/1998 seeking for a direction for release of the vehicle. It is stated in the writ petition that there was a direction to the third respondent therein to dispose of Ext.P3 produced therein and the same was finally rejected by the respondents. It is also stated that the petitioner filed Crl.M.C. No.6954/1998 wherein also a direction was issued. But the petitioner could not comply with the direction to furnish bank guarantee and he could not offer sufficient security for release of the vehicle. 2. Ext.P1 is the letter issued to him, wherein he was directed to inform his readiness, if any, to be shown for getting the release of the vehicle. The petitioner has approached this Court in these circumstances seeking for a direction to release the vehicle by depositing a sum of Rs.20,000/- as a condition for the same. wpc 31885/2009 2 3. In the statement filed by the respondents it is stated that the confiscation proceedings have become final and the C.M.A. filed by the petitioner before the District Court was finally dismissed as per judgment dated 1.10.2003. The said judgment has become final and therefore the confiscation of the vehicle has also attained a finality. Ext.P1 was issued on the wrong impression that the said appeal is still pending. 4. The respondents have therefore taken a stand that the vehicle cannot be released as it has become a property of the Government and it is stated that Ext.R(a) letter cannot therefore confer any right on the petitioner for getting the vehicle released. 5. In the light of the facts pointed out in the statement, the petitioner cannot seek for an interim release of the vehicle at this distance of time. The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore submitted that if the respondent takes any steps for disposal of the vehicle by public auction, he may be given due intimation in that regard. It is also prayed that he may be allowed to participate in the auction. 6. If the respondent takes steps for disposal of the vehicle by public wpc 31885/2009 3 auction, the petitioner will be entitled to participate in the auction and due intimation will be given to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/