IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2011 / 3RD ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 22160 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :- -------------------------- R. JAYAKUMAR, S/O. RAJAYYAN, AGED 40 YEARS, VATTAVILA, ILANJIVILLA, THIKKURISSI, PANCODE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) RESPONDENT(S) :- --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR), COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEMAM POLICE STATION, NEMAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GP MR.L.G.SURESH BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt WP(C).No. 22160 OF 2008 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Ext.P1 :- Copy of the relevant page of the R.C.Book of the vehicle endorsing transfer of the above lorry. Ext.P2 :- Copy of the Retail Bill regarding the purchase of the sand. Ext.P3 :- Copy of the pass for transportation of the sand issued on 26.5.2008 at 1.50 PM to the lorry. Ext.P3(a) :- True translation of Exhibit P3 challan. Ext.P4 :- Copy of the document showing payment of Entry tax in respect of the load issued frm checkpost dated 26.5.2008. Ext.P5 :- Copy of the order confiscating the vehicle of the petitioner dated 28.6.2008. Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL. //True Copy// P.A. to Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.22160 of 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of June 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the owner of a lorry bearing Reg.No.TN- 57-Y-4595. Proceedings were initiated against him under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and Ext.P5 notice was issued. It was challenging Ext.P5, the writ petition was filed. 2. This Court passed an order dated 12.8.2008 directing that on deposit of the value, the vehicle shall be released to the petitioner. It is stated accordingly the vehicle was released. 3. When the writ petition was taken for final hearing, the learned Govt. Pleader submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, the 3rd respondent has passed final order on 18.6.2008. According to him, this writ W.P.(C).No.22160 of 2008 -: 2 :- petition was filed challenging a notice issued and that in view of the subsequent developments, the petition has become infructuous. 4. I have considered the submissions, how that final order has been passed, if at all petitioner is aggrieved, it is for him to work out remedy against the said order. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to seek his remedy against the aforesaid order in accordance with law, writ petition disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Jvt