IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2010 / 27TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31956 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ FIROZ BABU E., S/O. MOHAMMED NAJEEB, ERANJIKKAL HOUSE, MAMPAD P.O., NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM-676 505. 3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, WANDOOR POLICE STATION, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM-676 324. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 31956 of 2010 T ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 19th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P2, final order passed by the District Collector, exercising his powers under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Mining Act, 2001. By this order, after finding that tipper lorry bearing registration No.KL-11X-1131 was engaged in unauthorised transportation of river sand, the District Collector directed the petitioner to remit Rs.2,75,000/- and get the vehicle released. It is this order which is under challenge. 2. A reading of this order shows that on the materials available before the District Collector, it was proved beyond doubt that the vehicle was engaged in the unauthorised transportation of river sand. This finding of fact entered into by the District Collector, on the materials available before him, is unassailable and the petitioner has not produced anything W.P.(C) No.31956/10 : 2 : to disprove the said finding. That apart, it is clear from the order that the very same vehicle was engaged in similar proceedings on previous four occasions also. In that view of the matter, there is nothing to interfere with Ext.P2 and the writ petition is only to be dismissed and I do so. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks