IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17952 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUNIKUMAR M.K., MUTTUNKALCHIRAYIL HOUSE, THALAWADY SOUTH P.O.,THALAWADY EDATUVA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SASI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, ALLEPPEY. 2. THE ADDITIONAL THAHASILDAR, KUTTANADU ALLEPPEY. 3. SUB INSEPCETOR OF POLICE EDATHUVA ALLEPPEY. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 17952 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 10th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order of the District Collector, whereby, on a finding that the petitioner has transported river sand in violation of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act and Rules, the petitioner has been directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,38,000/- being the value of the vehicle towards the river the management fund. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has transported sand legally with supporting documents. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In Ext.P5 order there is a specific finding that the petitioner had submitted an application admitting violation and requesting for a lenient punishment. Nowhere in the writ petition has the petitioner stated that that finding in Ext.P5 is wrong and that he has not admitted guilt. Therefore, that finding remains uncontroverted. In view of the said finding, I do not think that the petitioner can now challenge Ext.P5. Therefore, there is no merit in the challenge against Ext.P5 and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2