IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 25100 of 2007(K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.MINI, W/O. MOHANAN, AGED 38, RESIDING AT KATTUNGAL HOUSE, KADALUNDI NAGARAM P.O., ARIYALLUR, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.HARISH R. MENON, MR.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, DISTRICT OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. V. TEKCHAND. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.25100/2007-K: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE MINI TIPPER JORRY BEARING REGN.NO.KL-10 Q 3888. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE CASH BILL NO. 467 DTD. 10/07/2007 ISSUED FOR THE PURCHASE OF SAND FROM TAMIL NADU. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE RETAIL INVOICE NO. 1209 DTD. 13/07/2007, SHOWING PAYMENT OF TAX. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE DELIVERY NOTE BEARING NUMBER 213944. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETTIONER'S HUSBAND ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.1. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 07/08/2007 PASSED BY THE R.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 25100 of 2007 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 3rd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Exhibit P6 Order passed by the 1st respondent directing the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.60,000/- to the River Management Fund, besides a fine of Rs.25,000/- ordered in connection with the offence stated as committed by the petitioner is under challenge in the present writ petition. 2. The petitioner is the registered owner of the Mini Tipper Lorry bearing No. KL-10/Q 3888. The petitioner’s vehicle was hired on 14.07.2007 to transport/remove sand from a lorry bearing no. TN 47/K 2425, which was transporting sand from Tamil Nadu to Tirur, when the lorry got trapped in a water-logged pot hole in Kadalundi, making it impossible to move out from there, with the load in it. By the time a portion of the sand from the above lorry bearing Tamil Nadu registration was removed to the vehicle of the petitioner, the 3rd respondent intercepted and caused the vehicle of the petitioner with half load of sand to be taken to the Police Station; which in turn was handed over to the Revenue Authorities, finally leading to the proceedings taken under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act 2001. W.P.(C) No. 25100 of 2007 -:2:- 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the sand brought in the lorry bearing Tamil Nadu Registration was having all the requisite documents including Exhibit P2 Cash Bill dated 10.07.2007 (issued by the vendor of the sand in Tamil Nadu along with the receipt showing the registration number of the lorry TN 47/K2425 in which sand was being transported), Exhibit P3 Cash Receipt dated 13.07.2007 as to the remittance of the prescribed tax at the Sales Tax check post at Meenakshipuram and also Exhibit P4 Delivery Note in respect of the sand. The petitioner’s case is that, despite the production of all the above documents and also a detailed representation preferred before the 1st respondent as borne Exhibit P5, the actual facts and circumstances have not been looked into while passing Exhibit P6 order in a mechanical and stereotyped manner. 4. No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents in respect of the specific pleadings raised by the petitioner. When the above matter came up for consideration before this Court on 18.08.2007, the custody of the vehicle was ordered to be released to the petitioner on condition that the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/-. There is no case for the petitioner that the interim order was not complied with by the respondents. However, as far as the sustainability of Exhibit P6 order passed by the 1st respondent is concerned, it is to be noted that the crucial question '' whether any offence has been committed by the petitioner'',(if Exhibit P2 to P4 produced by the petitioner are true) is not seen considered. If Exhibit P2 to P4 are genuine W.P.(C) No. 25100 of 2007 -:3:- and beyond challenge, there cannot be any offence as observed by the 1st respondent in Exhibit P6. Passing of Exhibit P6 order without considering the above vital documents and the specific case put forth by the petitioner in Exhibit P5 only shows the non-application of mind by the 1st respondent. Passing of such order in a mechanical manner has been deprecated by this Court as per the decision in Subramanian Vs. State of Kerala 2009 (1) KLT Page 77 (while upholding constitutional validity of the Act/Rules). As per the said verdict, concerned cases were remanded to the competent authority for being reconsidered, in view of the defects pointed out as above. The instant case also squarely comes within the scope of the said verdict as to the manner of adjudication in passing Ext.P6 without any regard to Exhibits P2 to P4 and also the grievance brought out in Exhibit P5; which accordingly is set aside. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration by the 1st respondent taking note all the relevant documents including Exhibits P2 to P4 and the contents of Ext. P5 representation preferred by the petitioner, in the light of the observations made herein before. Final orders shall be passed as above, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 4 months. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd.