IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 26124 of 2009(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- RASHEED, S/O.ABDU, OORSAMANNIL HOUSE, VADAKKUMURI, PARAPUR, KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAKKAL POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.N.RAVINDRAN,J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.26124 of 2009 - I ---------------------------------------- Dated 16th September, 2009 Judgment Heard Sri.Babu S.Nair, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.Narayanan, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is the registered owner of a mini lorry bearing registration No.KL-10/2160. It was seized by the second respondent Sub Inspector of Police on 15.3.2009 under the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 on the ground that it was used to carry river sand without a valid pass and produced before the District Collector, Malappuram. The District Collector thereupon issued Ext.P1 notice dated 22.7.2009 under section 17 (2) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 calling upon the petitioner to show cause within seven days as to why his vehicle should not be confiscated. Ext.P1 show cause notice is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. The petitioner contends relying on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Abdul Majeed v. District Collector (2009 (3) KLT 459) that the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities W.P.(C) No.26124/2009 2 (Prevention) Act, 2007 cannot be invoked to proceed against him or his vehicle. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-10/2160 to him forthwith. He also seeks a declaration that the proceedings initiated as per Ext.P1 is bad and that the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 cannot be invoked against him. 4. A Division Bench of this Court has in Abdul Majeed v. District Collector (supra) held that section 17 of the Kerala Anti- Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 cannot be invoked against owners of vehicles carrying river sand without a valid pass. The Division Bench held that action, if any, can be taken only under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and the rules framed thereunder. In the light of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Abdul Majeed v. District Collector (supra), it has to be necessarily held that Ext.P1 show cause notice issued by the District Collector, Malappuram under the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 is without the sanction or authority of law. 5. In Abdul Majeed v. District Collector (supra), the Division Bench of this Court had also directed that if the District W.P.(C) No.26124/2009 3 Collector intends to proceed under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001, such proceedings shall be initiated within one month from the date on which a copy of the judgment is produced before him. In that case, the vehicle involved had already released, by way of interim custody pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court on payment of the sum of Rs.25,000/- and the execution of a bond wherein the owner of the vehicle had undertaken not to alienate, encumber or otherwise dispose of the vehicle. In such circumstances, the Division Bench directed the District Collector to proceed against the vehicle under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and the rules framed thereunder within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the judgment. This Court also directed that if such proceedings are not initiated within the said time limit, the release of the vehicle pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court shall be treated as unconditional, the amounts deposited by the vehicle owner released and that the conditions imposed shall stand vacated. In cases where, vehicles had not been released by way of interim custody, this Court held that the vehicles shall be released to the owners on conditions imposed by this Court, namely payment W.P.(C) No.26124/2009 4 of the sum of Rs.25,000/- and the execution of a bond undertaking that the vehicles will not be alienated, encumbered or otherwise disposed of. In the light of the directions issued by the Division Bench in Abdul Majeed v. District Collector (supra), I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: (i) Ext.P1 and the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/petitioner's vehicle under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 shall stand quashed; (ii) The District Collector, Malappuram shall release the petitioner's vehicle to him on the petitioner depositing the sum of Rs.25,000/- and executing a bond undertaking that he will not encumber the vehicle or alienate or otherwise dispose of the same. The vehicle shall be released to the petitioner on the date he deposits the sum of Rs.25,000/- and executes the bond; (iii) The District Collector, Malappuram shall within one month from the date on which a certified copy of this judgment is produced before him or received by him also decide whether proceedings should be initiated against the petitioner's vehicle under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and the rules framed thereunder. If the District Collector initiates such proceedings, the same shall be finalised within two W.P.(C) No.26124/2009 5 months thereafter, after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The contentions of the petitioner on the merits are kept open. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge vaa