IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 20616 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DIVAKARAN T.K. S/O.KUNJAN EZHUTHASSAN, 31 YEARS,THANIKKAL HOUSE, PAMBADY, THIRUVILWAMAL, THRISSUR DT.(R.C.OWER OF VEHICLE KL-9-Q-8374) BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR -3. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAZHAYANNUR POLICE STATION, PAZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR DT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.20616 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT The vehicle belonging to the petitioner bearing registration No.KL-9-Q/8374 was seized by the 2nd respondent on 20.3.2009 on the ground that the same was involved in the illicit transportation of river sand. After enquiry, Ext.P2 order has been passed by the District Collector, affirming that the vehicle was used in contravention of the provisions of the Sand Act and requiring the petitioner to remit Rs.1,15,000/- towards river management fund. This is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. I have also perused the files, which have been produced by the learned Government Pleader. 3. The finding in Ext.P2 that the vehicle was used for illicit transportation of river sand hardly warrants any interference, since admittedly W.P.(C).No.20616 of 2009 :: 2 :: the vehicle was not accompanied by a pass issued by a competent Authority. Therefore, the said finding in Ext.P2 is affirmed. 4. But, I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the value of the vehicle has been fixed without a separate notice to the petitioner or hearing. On a perusal of the files, I find that there is an endorsement by one Mr.P.V.Dhaneshan, Motor Vehicles Inspector, Wadakkancherry that he had inspected the vehicle and at present the value of the vehicle is fixed as Rs.1,50,000/-. 5. The petitioner should be given an opportunity to prove the value of the vehicle. That has not been done in the present case. 6. Ext.P2 shall stand set aside to the limited extent of the value of the vehicle being determined therein for the purpose of requiring the petitioner to pay the same for redemption of the vehicle. Fresh orders, as regards the value of the vehicle shall be W.P.(C).No.20616 of 2009 :: 3 :: passed by the District Collector, after notice to the petitioner and after giving him an opportunity of proving the value of the vehicle, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge