IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2008 / 13TH POUSHA 1929 OP.No. 39363 of 2002(J) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.PRAKASAN, S/O.KUPPANDI, AGED 26, VALIYAKULAM HOUSE, KODUNTHIRAPALLY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA BABU THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP NO.66163/02 DISMISSED. 3/1/08 SD/- T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX EXT.P1-TRUE COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY R2 EXT.P2-TRUE COPY OF OBJECTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P1 // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.NO.39363 of 2002-J - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of a tipper lorry bearing registration No. KL-7F-3726. The vehicle is having a valid goods permit. The challenge in the original petition is against Ext.P1 order issued by the second respondent directing him to produce his vehicle for the purpose of surrendering the permit, purportedly at the instance of the first respondent. It appears that there was an allegation that the vehicle was involved in illicit mining and transportation of sand. 2. The petitioner asserts that his vehicle was not involved in any such illegal activities and that he was never issued with any notice by the District Collector also in the matter and according to him, he was totally kept in the dark about the above action. He was also not informed the circumstances under which the District Collector has instructed the R.T.O. to produce the vehicle before him. Accordingly, the petitioner had sent Ext.P2 objection before the second respondent and since no action was taken, he approached this court by filing this original petition. In C.M.P.No.66163/2002 dated 24.12.2002, this court had granted an interim order of stay pending the OP 39363/2002 -2- disposal of the original petition. 3. The respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. Only as per competent proceeding, a vehicle can be seized or confiscated. If the first respondent proposes to proceed against the vehicle owned by the petitioner for the alleged illicit mining and transportation of sand as mentioned in Ext.P1, he will issue a further notice to the petitioner showing the entire details of the allegations raised against him. The petitioner will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to object to the proposed action against him and he will be afforded a personal hearing also and the order thus passed will be served on him. This direction is confined to the allegation that is mentioned in Ext.P1 and this will not cover any other incident in which the vehicle might be involved. Subject to the above, the Original Petition is allowed and the direction contained in Ext.P1 is vacated. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ OP 39363/2002 -3- T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P. No.39363 of 2002-J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 3rd January, 2008.