IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17578 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SANTHOSH, S/O.KUMARAN, AGED 31 YEARS, BUSINESS, CHALLIYIL HOUSE, AZHIKODE P.O., AZHIKODE VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, (OWNER OF A MINI LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.(KL-7-Q-6633). BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKOM POLICE STATION. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.V.MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 17578/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE PASS DTD.3.5.09. P2. COPY OF THE PETITION DTD.4.5.09. P3. COPY OF THE ORDER IN W.P.(C).No. 13233/2009. P4. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.27.5.09. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: R1A. COPY OF THE MAHZAR DTD.4.6.2010. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 17578 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 19th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 order of the District Collector Thrissur, passed under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. By that order, on a finding that the vehicle involved was used for illegal transportation of river sand, the petitioner was directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- as value of the vehicle towards river management fund. 2. The petitioner's contention is that the sand was not river sand and it was accompanied by Ext.P1 Form P cash memorandum issued under Rule 48K of the Kerala Mineral Minor Concession Rules. 1967. 3. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit, wherein it has been stated that on evidence, it was found that the sand in the vehicle was river sand and at the time of seizure, water was dripping from the sand in the vehicle. Further the learned Government Pleader points out that Ext.P1 is not for river sand, but for ordinary sand. A cash memorandum under Rule 48K has to be in the form signed and sealed by the concerned geologist. Ext.P1 does not contain any signature or seal of the geologist and, therefore, the same cannot be accepted as genuine document, is the contention raised by the learned w.p.c.17578/2009 2 Government Pleader. The learned Government Pleader also submits that after the very same vehicle was released on interim custody, the same was seized again for illegal transport of river sand. 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 5. The District Collector has, on an evidence, come to the finding that the sand in the vehicle was river sand. He has given reasons for coming to that conclusion also. The petitioner's only contention is that the sand is ordinary sand accompanied by Ext.P1 cash memorandum. As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, Ext.P1 does not contain any signature or seal of the geologist, which is mandatory for a valid form P cash memorandum issued under Rule 48K. Therefore, Ext.P1 cannot be accepted as a genuine document to support the contention of the petitioner. The fact that the very same vehicle was seized for illegal transport of river sand again is a further ground which supports the finding of the District Collector. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.17578/2009 3 sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE