IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 30TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 5517 of 2010(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.A.KUTTYYAMMI, NOUKA, VADUTHALA JETTY P.O., AROOKUTTY, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOCHAKKAL POLICE STATION. 3. MINERAL REVENUE INSPECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MINING & GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.5517/2010-L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 19th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is the registered owner of a tipper lorry bearing registration No.KL-32-1977. On 19/01/2010 the said vehicle was intercepted by the second respondent and was seized alleging violation of Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and rules promulgated thereunder. A crime was accordingly registered by the police under Sections 17(4), 23 read with Section 20 of the Act. Ext.P1 is the copy of the F.I.R in Crime No.35/2010 of Poochackal Police Station. It is the case of the petitioner that at the time of seizure, the vehicle was being used for transporting Kayal sand purchased from an authorised dealer. Ext.P2 is the copy of the cash memorandum in 'P' Form issued under Rule 48 K of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1967. It is submitted that without verifying Ext.P2 document submitted by the driver of the vehicle, the said vehicle was seized. The petitioner made a request to the first respondent for interim custody of the vehicle in the light of the decision of this Court in Subramanian v. State of Kerala [2009 (1) KLT 77). Ext.P3 is the copy of the said W.P.(C). No.5517/2010 -:2:- request. Aggrieved by the delay in disposal of the said application, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the hearing of the matter is already over. 4. There will be a direction to the first respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 within a period of seven days from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, in the light of the well settled principles laid down by this Court in various decisions and, on such terms and conditions which he deems fit to impose. The matter will be considered in accordance with law. In view of the fact that the hearing is already over, there will be a further direction to the first respondent to pass final orders within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after considering the pleas raised by the petitioner, on merits. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms