IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 15TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 24337 of 2011(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL LATHEEF.P., S/O.HYDRU.P., PONKULAM HOUSE, CHERUKULAMBA, VATTALLUR.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (RC OWNER OF KL-10-R/4998) BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE/RDO, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF RDO, PERINTHALMANNA, PERINTHALMANNA.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. TAHSILDAR, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, PERINTHALMANNA.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLATHUR POLICE STATION, KOLATHUR.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. KODUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KODUR.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 504, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. SR GP SMT.M.J.RAJASHREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24337 of 2011 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE RIVER SAND PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 9.9.10 FOR THE VEHICLE KL-10-R/4998 EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 3.8.11 FOR INTERIM CUSTODY OF THE VEHICLE EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 19.8.11 (True copy) P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).24337/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 6th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT 1.In this writ petition, the petitioner complains that his vehicle bearing registration No.KL-10-R/4998 has been detained on the allegation that the vehicle was used for transportation of river sand in violation of the provisions contained in the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. According to the petitioner, though he has made Ext.P2 application for interim custody of the vehicle, his application was not considered. With this grievance, the writ petition has been filed. 2.A Full Bench of this Court in Shan C.T. v. State of Kerala [2010(3)KHC 333] has laid down the manner in which such applications for interim custody should be dealt with. Therefore, all that is necessary in the Writ Petition is to direct that the statutory authority, before whom Ext.P2 application has been made, shall deal with the application in the light of the provisions of the Act referred above and in the manner as directed by the Full Bench of this Court in the judgment referred as above. W.P.(C).24337/11 2 3.The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition before the concerned authority for appropriate action. Writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs