IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35480 of 2010(H) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. M.V.SIVADAS, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, MADATHUMPADI HOUSE, VADAKKETHARA, PAZHAYANNUR.P.O., THRISSUR. 2. MANIKANDAN.M.C., S/O.CHAMI, MOOCHIKULAM HOUSE, KALLEPPADA, PAZHAYANNUR.P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT LEVEL EXPERT COMMITTEE (RIVER SAND ACT), REP.BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR - 680 001. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR - 680 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.35480 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of November, 2010. J U D G M E N T Apparently aggrieved by 'clause 6' of Ext.P1 order, not permitting to transport river sand by bullock carts, the petitioners, who are the owners of bullock carts, have filed Ext.P2 and P2(a) representations before the 2nd respondent. In this writ petition, they complain that in view of Ext.P1 order of the 1st respondent, they are deprived of their livelihood and that there is no statutory provision justifying such a decision by the respondents. 2. Although, prima facie I find substance in what is contended, still having regard to the pendency of the representations, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider the afore said representations filed by the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment, along with copy of this writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge. ami/