IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2010 / 11TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13362 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABY,AGED 54 YEARS S/O.GEORGE, ALUNIKKUM THUNDIYIL, ALA, CHENGANNURE THALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SRI.P.J.VINOD JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. VILLLAGE OFFICER, KADAPRA THIRUVALLA THALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. SUB INSPECTOR PULIKKEEZHU POLICE STATION,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K. RAMESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 13362 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 1st day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner's vehicle has been seized on allegations of violation of the provisions of the Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the grievance that without passing final orders as contemplated under the Act, the respondents have taken steps to auction the vehicle. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i) To call for the records leading to the confiscation of the vehicle bearing Registration No. KL-2G 1503 to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the proceeding related to the same. ii) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 4 to release petitioner's vehicle bearing Registration No. KL-2G 1503 by declaring that the said lorry was not used for illegal transportation of red earth. iii) to issue a writ of mandamus declaring that the seizure of petitioner's vehicle by the revenue officials are irrational and illegal and to direct the respondents to release the same, forthwith.” 2. On 20-4-2010, I passed the following interim order: “Petitioner's vehicle shall not be auctioned except after serving an appealable order on him.” Learned counsel for the petitioner now submits that retaining the interim order, the 1st respondent may be directed to finalise the proceedings expeditiously. 3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to pass final orders pursuant to the seizure of the petitioner's vehicle as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a W.P.C. No. 13362/2010. -: 2 :- copy of this judgment. Till final orders are so passed, the interim order passed on 20-4-2010 would continue to be in force. Needless to say, orders shall be passed only after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.