IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2010 / 28TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 26254 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DHANEESH,MOONNAM MILE,ELAPPARA,IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.N.MANU THAMPI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARAYAMKODE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 26254 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 19th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 order passed by the District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram, wherein, on a finding that the petitioner has transported river sand in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, the petitioner has been directed to pay an amount of Rs.95,000/- as value of the vehicle towards river management fund. Inter alia, the petitioner contends that as on 23.7.2010, which is the date of passing Ext.P1 order, the District Collector could not have validly passed Ext.P1 order, insofar as as on that date, the original authority competent to pass orders under the Act was the Sub Divisional Magistrate. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. After amendment of the Act by the ordinance which came into force on 14.6.2010, it is the Sub Divisional Magistrate who is competent to pass original orders under Section 23 of the Act. Therefore, the District Collector could not have passed validly Ext.P1 order on 23.7.2010. Therefore, Ext.P1 order is quashed. The appropriate authority under the Act, as amended, shall pass fresh orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any w.p.c.26254/10 2 rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It would be open to the petitioner to seek interim custody of the vehicle also, which shall be disposed of in accordance with law. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge