IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 15TH BHADRA 1932 WA.No. 1160 of 2010 --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.16405/2010 Dated 28/05/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------- HARIDASAN,S/O.MUNDAN,1/253, PAZHAMBRAM VEEDU,KUTTIPURAM PO, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHANGARAMKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR(ELECTION), MALAPPURAM. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY REVENUE, TRIVANDRUM. BY SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER, SMT. K.MEERA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 1160 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. The appellant was the writ petitioner. The challenge in the writ petition was with regard to the finalisation of the confiscation proceedings by the 2nd respondent, under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks & Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001; whereby the petitioner was mulcted with the liability of depositing Rs.3.5 lakhs, so as to release the vehicle. 2. Sequence of events as narrated in the proceedings reveals that the petitioner, who is stated as the owner of a Mini Lorry bearing No.KL-07-AZ/6087, was transporting 'river sand' on 28.01.2010, when it was intercepted by the 1st respondent. After preparing Ext.P2 Mahazar, followed by Ext.P3 FIR, the matter was referred to the appropriate authority under the Kerala Protection of River Banks & Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The appellant/writ W.A.No. 1160 OF 2010 -:2:- petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.3776 of 2010 seeking for releasing the vehicle, wherein Ext.P4 verdict was passed, directing the matter to be considered. Pursuant to the said verdict, Ext.P5 interim order was passed by the District Collector, directing the petitioner to satisfy Rs.2 lakhs so as to release the vehicle, which however, was not complied with. Finally, Ext.P7 order was passed by the 2nd respondent, which in turn was subjected to challenge in W.P.(C) No.16405 of 2010, wherein the impugned judgment has been passed. 3. The learned Single Judge found that the petitioner did not have a valid pass to transport 'river sand'. It has been specifically observed that, Ext.P1 pass was issued in respect of transportation of 'ordinary sand' and not in respect of 'river sand'. This being the position, the transportation of sand effected by the petitioner was held as illegal and interference was declined. The learned Single Judge has also observed that the fixation of value of vehicle by the second respondent was based on the report submitted by the concerned Joint RTO, as referred to in Ext.P7 and perfectly within the four walls of the law, being W.A.No. 1160 OF 2010 -:3:- in conformity with the mandate given by this Court in similar circumstances. No tenable ground has been raised to support the relief sought for and hence no interference is warranted. The Writ Appeal fails and the same is dismissed accordingly. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Judge. ttb