IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2010 / 8TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 31981 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHANITH K.S., S/O. SANKARAN, AGED 32 YEARS, KOOTTALA HOUSE, MANGATTUKARA, ANTHIKKAD P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANTHIKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.A. ASIF. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 31981 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 29th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext. P5 order passed by the 1st respondent under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. By that order, on a finding that the petitioner has been transporting river sand illegally using the vehicle involved, the petitioner was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2,10,000/- as value of the vehicle towards River Management Fund. Among the contentions raised by the petitioner, one is that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of being heard before passing Ext. P5 order. The petitioner points out that although a counter affidavit has been filed, the specific contention of the petitioner in this regard has not been controverted. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. On a perusal of the writ petition and the counter affidavit, I find that the petitioner has raised a specific contention that the petitioner was not heard before passing Ext. P5 order and that the same has not been controverted in the counter affidavit. That means that the petitioner's contention has to accepted in that regard. Accordingly, insofar as Ext. P5 order has been passed without hearing the petitioner, the same is quashed. The District Collector shall pass fresh orders after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner expeditiously. In the meanwhile, the condition for granting interim custody of the vehicle shall continue to be in force. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.