IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2011 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10463 of 2011(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------- M.R.SREEMON, S/O.RAMESAN, AGED 23 YEARS, DRIVER, MASAMPADANA, ANAPUZHA, KOTTAPURAM P.O., KODUNGALLUR DESOM, METHALA VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT (AGREEMENT HOLDER OF A MINI LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO. KL-07-P-5196). BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-688732. 2. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR, PIN-682301. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 10463 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 1st April, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is before this Court in the second round of litigation with regard to the claim to have the vehicle bearing No. KL.07/P-5196 released, which was taken into custody in connection with the involvement in an offence under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 . 2. At the earlier instance, when the vehicle was taken into custody, on 19.11.2010, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.37935 of 2010 which culminated in Ext. P1 judgment , whereby the claim was directed to be considered by the competent authority in the light of law declared by the Full Bench of this Court in Shan C.T. vs. State of Kerala, (2010 (3) KHC 333) . It was pursuant to the said verdict Ext.P2 order was passed on 25.01.2011, whereby the petitioner was directed W.P.(C) No. 10463 OF 2011 2 to satisfy 30% of the total value of the vehicle and to furnish Bank Guarantee or immovable property as security for the balance amount. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has furnished Ext.P3 Solvency Certificate, which has to be considered by the second respondent so as to give effect to the verdict passed by this court vide Ext.P1. 4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well 5. It is brought to the notice of this Court that Ext. P3 Solvency Certificate has been issued only on 07.03.2011 , i.e. after passing Ext. P2 order dated 25.01.2011. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner might be given an opportunity to substantiate the facts and credentials before the second respondent and to have the vehicle released based on Ext. P3, which in fact has to be considered by the said respondent . In the said circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider Ext. P3 and pass necessary orders in connection with the issue forming the W.P.(C) No. 10463 OF 2011 3 subject matter of Exts.P1 and P2, which shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 'three weeks' from the date of production of a copy of judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. It will be for the second respondent to stipulate necessary conditions so as to protect the interests of the Revenue, in tune with the verdict passed by the Full Bench as mentioned in Ext. P1. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk