IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2011 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 33028 of 2011(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MANIKANDAN, AGED 28, S/O.VENU (GOPALAN), 2/204, MAMBRA HOUSE, EZHUVATHURUTHY, ESWARAMANGALAM PO, OWNER OF VEHICLE NO.KL-7 K 1512 AT PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SRI.T.A.ABDUL RASHEED SMT.RENJINI RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, (REVENUE DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIATE, TRIVANDRUM 695001. 2. THE PORT CONSERVATOR, OFFICE OF THE PORT CONSERVATOR, PORT AND SHIPPING, PONNANI-HARBOUR, PONNANI PO 679583. 3. PONNANI MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. PONNANI MUNICIPALITY, PONNANI PO 679583, MALAPPURAM DT. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASREE SRI.MOHAMMED IQBAL SC FOR MUNICIPALITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.33028/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION IN VEHICLE WITH KL-7 K 1512. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PASS DATED 14.11.11 ISSUED TO THE VEHICLE KL-7L-1512. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE judgment IN WPC NO.23818/11 DATED 26.9.11. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 33028 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 12th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The grievance of the petitioner is regarding the restriction imposed by the Ponnani Municipality and the Port Conservator of the Ponnani Port, restricting transportation of sand from Ponnani Port only within the Malappuram District. 2. Earlier, identically placed petitioners had approached this Court by filing WP(C) Nos.23810 & 23818 of 2011. These writ petitions were disposed of by judgment dated 20th September, 2011. In that judgment, it was held thus:- “Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent Municipality submits that, in the writ petition resulting in Ext.P7 judgment, there was a direction issued by this Court to the effect that the sand from the Ponnani Port should be transported only within the Malappuram District and that it was therefore that such a condition was insisted. It is stated that when the writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P7 judgment, such a condition has not been retained. On this ground, the Municipality submits that it is now free to issue passes enabling transportation of the sand from the Ponnani Port to places outside Malappuram District. Now that such a submission has been made on behalf of the second respondent, which is the authority to issue the transportation passes, it is not necessary for this Court to examine the contentions raised by the petitioners on merits. WPC No.33028/11 :2 : In that view of the matter, these writ petitions are disposed of leaving it open to the second respondent to issue passes permitting transportation of the sand in question to places outside Malappuram District.” 3. Following the said judgment WP(C) No.25659/11 was filed, which was also disposed of by judgment dated 3rd October, 2011. Thus the issue raised in the writ petition is fully covered by the aforesaid judgments. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is also disposed of directing that the 3rd respondent is free to issue passes enabling transportation of sand from the Ponnani Port to places outside Malappuram District. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp