IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6002 of 2011(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SHYJU, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, NELLITHANATH HOUSE, SHENGULAM KARA, VELLATHOOVAL VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PADAYATTEE YELDO RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI, CIVIL STATION, KUYILIMALA, PAINAVU.P.O., THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 6002 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 8th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he is the registered owner of a Jeep bearing Regn.No.KL-03/B 2145. Proceedings were initiated against the vehicle under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. Those proceedings concluded as per Ext.P3. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner has filed Ext.P5 revision before the District Collector. In Ext.P5, petitioner also requested for giving him interim custody of the vehicle. Revision has not been heard and his request for interim custody also has not been considered. It is complaining of the above, the writ petition is filed. 2. As far as the merits of the dispute is concerned, now that the revision is pending, it is for the Revisional Authority to consider those contentions and I refrain myself from venturing into those areas. 3. Now what remains is the grievance of the petitioner that the request for interim custody is not considered. A reading of Ext.P5 shows that a prayer has been made by the petitioner for WPC No. 6002/11 :2 : interim custody. Now that such a request has been made and as the District Collector has not considered the same so far, it is directed that, on the production of a copy of this judgment the District Collector will consider the request of the petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle and pass orders thereon in accordance with the principles laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Shan C.T. v. State of Kerala [2010(3)KHC 333]. 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the District Collector for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp