IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WA.No. 1552 of 2011() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.24716/2011 Dated 19/09/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONERS. ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. UDAYAKUMAR SHETTY,S/O.SADASHIVA SHETTY, AGED 30 YEARS,HOUSE NO.3/156,THALAPPADY, MANGALORE TALUK,SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE. 2. M.RAMANANDA PAI,S/O.VENKATARAMANA PAI, AGED 47 YEARS,RESIDING AT "MAHALASA",OLD POLICE QUARTERS,PUTHUR TALUK,SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE. 3. ASRAF,S/O.AHAMMED KUTTY,AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.9/214,KULANGARA PEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,THAMARASSERY.P.O,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KERALA. 4. MOHAMMED.E,S/O.ALI,AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT EDAKKIROAD(H),MUTTAMCHERY,MADVOOR VILLAGE,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,KERALA STATE. BY ADV. SRI.R.UDAYA KUMAR SRI.JACOB E SIMON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD. WA.No. 1552 of 2011 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD. CRIME NO.603/11, 606/11 AND 549/11. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETRIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2011, ALONG WITH WA NO. 1557 OF 2011 & WA NO. 1599 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag.C.J & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1552 of 2011, W.A.No. 1557 of 2011 & W.A.No. 1599 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Manjula Chellur, Ag.C.J. The appellants are before us contending that they have transported sand from the State of Karnataka after complying with all the necessary formalities under the Statute in the vehicles belonging to them. It is not in dispute that after passing through the check-post, the second respondent-authority seized the said vehicles on the ground that it is in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The second respondent-authority is the person, who has to see whether there is real violation of the above said Act. When the matters are pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, the statutory authority, which has to not only see the provisions of the concerned Act, but also the factual situation, the learned Single Judge was justified in saying that it is a WA.1557/11 2 premature stage to consider whether there was violation of any of the statutory provisions concerned. We note that against the orders of the second respondent authority, under the Statute, there is a provision for revision and appeal as well. Under these circumstances, we find no good ground to interfere with the judgments of the learned Single Judge. The Writ Appeals are dismissed accordingly. The appellants are at liberty to raise all the contentions raised before this Court, before the authorities also. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE vgs