IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28965 of 2011(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- REEBA GIGI, W/O.GIGI MAHTEW, 4/321,CHUDUKATTIL HOUSE, PACHA, CHEKKIDIKADU P.O.,EDATHUA,ALAPPUZHA-689573 BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN SMT.T.J.SEEMA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA-688001 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THAKAZHI, ALAPPUZHA-688562 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDATHUA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA-689573 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.28965/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NUMBER KL-04/11-3877 EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF INSUREANCE OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NUMBER KL-04/11-3877. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NUMBER KL-04/11-3877. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE CASH MEMORANDUM DTD 19/10/2011 EVIDENCING PAYMENT FOR PASS EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER,THAKAZHI EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD 24/1/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER DTD 17.2.2011. EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA,DTD 18/2/2011. EXT.P9:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD 20/10/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND BEFORE THE R.D.O.ALAPPUZHA. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 28965 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 11th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be the owner of tipper lorry bearing Regn.No.KL-04/AA 3877. According to the petitioner, on the allegation that the vehicle was used for reclamation of a land in violation of the provisions contained in the Kerala Land Utilization Order, by Ext.P5 mahazar, the vehicle was seized by the 2nd respondent. It is stated that the proceedings are pending before the 1st respondent and at that stage writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings. 2. In my view, when allegation of violation of Kerala Land Utilization Order is raised, it cannot be said that such proceedings initiated against the vehicle is without jurisdiction. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to appear before the adjudicating authority, contest the matter and get herself exonerated of the proceedings. Therefore, I refrain from entering into the merits of this controversy atleast at this stage. 3. Be that as it may, no useful purpose will be served on keeping the vehicle under detention pending finalisation of the WPC No. 28965/11 :2 : proceedings and it is seen that seeking release of the vehicle pending finalisation of the proceedings, petitioner's husband has already submitted Ext.P9 application. 4. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing the RDO to pass orders on Ext.P9 giving interim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner subject to the conditions, which he may deem fit to impose. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the RDO for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp