IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 7TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 25979 of 2009(N) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SAMEER M.K., S/O.ABOOBACKER, AGED 24 YEARS, MELANIKUNNATH HOUSE, OMASSERY, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKKODE. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUKKOM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVOCATE GENERAL MR. C.P.SUDHAKARA PRASAD & BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.T.B.HOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2009 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.25868 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) Nos.25979, 25868, 25884, 25963, 26050, 26057, 26079, 26125, 26142, 26143, 26181, 26256, 26258, 26484 & 26485 of 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 29th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioners in these cases are owners/operators of goods carriages. Their vehicles were seized either by the police officials or the revenue officials, on the allegation that they were found transporting river sand illegally. The seizure has been reported to the District Collector concerned. The respective District Collectors are taking steps to confiscate the vehicles. Challenging those steps and also praying to release the vehicles pending finalisation of the confiscation proceedings, these Writ Petitions have been filed. A learned Single Judge of this Court noticing the apparent conflict between the decisions of this Court in Ahammed Kutty v. State of Kerala, 2008 (1) KLT 1068 and Shoukathali v. Tahsildar, 2009 (1) KLT 640, has referred certain cases, in W.P.(C) Nos.25979/09 etc. - 2 - which the District Collectors have passed confiscation orders, to the Division Bench. Along with those cases, these Writ Petitions were also referred. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is mainly concerning the interim custody of their vehicles. Once they get interim custody of their vehicles, they can be said to be aggrieved if only the final orders of the District Collectors concerned go against them. So, at this stage, it is unnecessary for us to go into the validity of the confiscation proceedings. Both sides brought to our notice a decision of a Single Judge of this Court in Subramanian v. State of Kerala, 2009 (1) KLT 77, wherein it was held that the District Collector has got the incidental power to order release of the vehicle as an interim measure, having regard to the powers of the said officer under Section 23 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 read with Rules 27 and 28 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Rules, 2002. We are in agreement with the said view taken by the learned Single Judge W.P.(C) Nos.25979/09 etc. - 3 - in that decision. Therefore, the District Collector concerned are directed to pass final orders in the confiscation proceedings against the petitioners as expeditiously as possible. If there is delay in passing final orders beyond one week from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, the District Collector shall release the vehicles concerned to the petitioners, subject to such conditions and restrictions as they deem fit, having regard to the facts of the case concerned. With the above directions, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. Sd/- K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. Sd/- P.Bhavadasan, Judge. DK. (True copy)