IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2011 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14805 of 2011(A) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SUSAN VARGHESE,MUTHALAKKERIYIL, KUZHIMATTAM,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. SHIJU.P.THOMAS,PERUMPADATH,VAZHAPPALLA WEST,CHANGANACHERRY. 3. M.N.ANIL KUMAR,MOOTHEDATH,CHAMPAKKARA. 4. SIBICHAN JOHN,KANTRAMATTAM,THOTTAKKAD. 5. SREENATH.P.V,PADINJARE PANDARATHIL, URIKKARI,KUTTANAD. BY ADV. MR. R.AZAD BABU RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,COLLECATORATE, ALAPPUZHA-688001. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA-688001. 3. TAHSILDAR,KUTTANADU,MONCOMBU, ALAPPUZHA-688502. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P. N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 14805 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 2nd June , 2011 JUDGMENT The vehicles belonging to the petitioners (bearing Nos. KL17 8933, KL 05 X 1168, KL05 P 8227, KL 33 A 8077, KL 01 AM 2173 KL 10 9010 respectively) were seized on 04.01.2011 as per Ext. P4 mahazar, allegedly in respect of the violation of the relevant provisions of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1957. As per Ext. P1 order dated 12.01.2011, a fine was imposed, giving direction to the concerned Tahasildar to release the vehicles on remitting the fine as aforesaid. 2. Pursuant to Ext. P1 order, it is seen that, the Additional Tahasildar passed consequential order on 17.01.2011 as borne by Ext. P5 , on the basis of which, the petitioners satisfied the amount due and the vehicles were got released. No challenge was ever raised in respect of the proceedings at any time. Now, the petitioners have approached this Court stating that, satisfaction of fine amount was 'under protest' and hence interference is sought to be made, raising W.P. (C) No. 14805 of 2011 : 2 : many a ground, both factual and legal. Reliance is also sought to be placed on Ext. P3 which is stated as submitted by the petitioner before the Tahasildar. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Obviously, Ext. P3 is not at all dated, nor is there any proof as to submission of the same before any of the respondents. Even if it is presumed that fine amount vide Ext. P1 was satisfied by the petitioner 'under protest', nothing prevented the petitioner from sending the 'protest memo' immediately after receipt of Ext. P1 or Ext. P5, within a reasonable time by registered post. Ext. P5 order was passed on 17.01.2011 by the 'Additional Tahasildar', giving necessary directions to the S.I. of Police to release the vehicle after unloading the materials loaded in the vehicles. Ext. P3 is stated as preferred before the 'Tahasildar', Kuttanadu Taluk; however without any legally acceptable materials to arrive at any inference that the same was actually after passing the impugned orders within a reasonable time. In the above circumstances, this Court does not find it as fit case to call for interference, invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. W.P. (C) No. 14805 of 2011 : 3 : The Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving all the legal questions raised by the petitioner open. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd