IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3915 of 2009(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL RAHIMAN, S/O. ABOOBACKER, VELLARAM PARA HOUSE, PANIPARA.P.O, EDAVANNA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT (OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REG. NO. KL-10-AA/8089) BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.P.VENUGOPAL (1086/92) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No.3915 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Exhibit P6 order is under challenge. Exhibit P2 is the representation made by the petitioner to the second respondent, which shows that his vehicle bearing registration no. KL 10-AA/8089 was seized on the allegation that was engaged in the unauthorised transportation of river sand. Exhibit P6 is the order passed by the second respondent. A reading of Exhibit P6 shows that in order to justify the unauthorised transportation, the petitioner contended that it was on account of the repairs of the vehicle that the transportation was delayed. In support of this plea, petitioner had produced a bill issued by the mechanic in this regard. The District Collector examined the bill and found that the bill was issued for the repairs effected on 7/10/2008 and that the vehicle was seized on 8/10/2008. In my view, from the above findings itself, it is evident that the transportation of river sand on 8/10/2008 was not supported by any valid pass. If that be so, findings of the District Collector deserves to be upheld and I do so. Writ petition fails and hence, it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm