IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3312 of 2009(T) ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ V.P.MOIDEENKUTTY, 22 YEARS, S/O.ABDULLAKUTTY KALATHIL HOUSE MAMPAD PO., NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 3. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBUR. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 3312 OF 2009 (T) ==================== Dated this the 16th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the agreement owner of a mini lorry bearing Regn.No.KL-10/G. 692. It is stated that the vehicle was seized on 23/1/2009. According to the petitioner, the seizure of the vehicle invoking Section 17 of the Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention Act) 2007 is totally unjustified as there was no occasion for initiating any such proceedings. 2. Learned Government Pleader submits that on 30/12/2008 and 9/1/2009, the vehicle was intercepted when it was found to have been involved in the unauthorised transportation of river sand. It is stated that on both occasions the driver of the vehicle escaped from the scene with the lorry itself. It was in view of the repeated occurrence that the vehicle was seized on 23/1/2009 invoking the provisions of the aforesaid Act. 3. Now that the proceedings are pending against the vehicle under the aforesaid Act, the only order which the petitioner can seek is a direction to the respondents to expedite the proceedings as ordered by this court in the judgment in WP(C) No.29479/08. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of reiterating the WPC 3312/09 :2 : directions issued in the judgment referred to above, which reads as under. (1) The District Collector shall within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, send notice to the petitioner clearly indicating the grounds, if any, on the basis of which, they propose to hold that the vehicle in question was or is apprehended that it would be used for Anti Social Activities within the meaning of the Act. (2) A minimum of 7 days time must be granted to the petitioner to file objections thereto. (3) The District Collector shall then post the case before him for a hearing, latest within 10 days from the date on which the objection is received from the owner/possessor and the owner/possessor shall be heard. (4) The proceedings under Section 17(3) shall be passed, latest, within 3 weeks from the date on which such objection is filed. (5) In case, the Collector feels that the confiscation of the vehicle is not necessary or that he is satisfied that the WPC 3312/09 :3 : vehicle is unlikely to be used for Anti Social Activities or illegal activities, then it is open to him to pass orders for release of the same. The respondents shall comply with the aforesaid direction. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp