IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 5TH MAY 2009 / 15TH VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 13102 of 2009(G) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ G.ANILKUMAR, PROPRIETOR, A & K, EARTH MOVERS, CHIKKANELPUTHEN VEEDU, MANGARAM, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (SOUTHERN RANGE), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONNI. SRI. M.P. SREEKUMAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ----------------------------------- W.P(C) No. 13102 OF 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT The main grievance of the petitioner is that, though he is having the requisite licence for bringing river sand from Tamil Nadu, his vehicles are being arbitrarily detained by the respondents causing much loss and hardship to him. The learned counsel for the petitioner, placing reliance on Ext. P7 order passed by the Supreme Court submits that the petitioner is pursuing his trade strictly in accordance with law which cannot be intercepted by the respondents, unless otherwise than under due process of law. 2. It is noted that when the petitioner had earlier approached this court by filing W.P.(C) 26269/08 (with slight modification in the prayer) the same was declined by Ext. P4 stating that the relief prayed for was not in respect of any specific instance and hence could not be granted; which in turn was confirmed by a Division Bench vide Ext.P5. However, similar verdict passed by the Division Bench in similar circumstances as borne by Ext. P6 was set aside by the Apex Court vide Ext.P7, the last paragraph of which is extracted hereunder: W.P(C) No. 13102/2009 -2- “The observations made by the learned Single Judge makes it clear that the approach of the High Court in this particular matter is erroneous, having particular regard to Article 301 of the Constitution, which is subject to Article 304 of the Constitution. The appellant, in our view, has every right to trade in the State of Kerala subject to the restrictions imposed in keeping with Article 304. Conversely, the State of Kerala and its authorities will also be entitled to impose restrictions as contemplated under Article 304 of the Constitution, but again subject to the right of the appellant to question the same in accordance with law. As the matter now stands, the appellant cannot be prevented from bringing its goods into the State of Kerala lawfully. In that view of the matter, we allow the appeal, set aside the orders passed by both the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court and direct that the appellant's vehicles should not be detained at the border check post in Kerala, except in accordance with law.” W.P(C) No. 13102/2009 -3- 3. In view of the dictum laid by the Apex Court, which is the law of the land by virtue of Article 141 of the Constitution of India, the above Writ Petition is disposed of granting similar relief to the petitioner holding that the petitioner's vehicles shall not be detained by the border checkpost in Kerala, except in accordance with law. W.P(C) is disposed of accordingly. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE vkm