IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2011 / 15TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 281 of 2011(I) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SHAJAN, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAKUTTY, VAILOPPILLI HOUSE, THRIKKUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR-680001. 2. GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT OFFICE, THRISSUR. 680001 3. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, PUDUKKAD P.O., THRISSUR.PIN- 680 301 R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.281 of 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 5th January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be the owner of a JCB bearing registration No. KL-8 AM 8944 and a tipper lorry with registration No. KL 17 A 1742. According to the petitioner, while transporting 'mattimanal' for which no permission is necessary from the 2nd respondent, the vehicle was seized by the 3rd respondent along with three motors. It is challenging the seizure of the vehicles and other articles, the writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioner is that since mattimanal transported in the vehicles are not covered by the provisions of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, the seizure itself is illegal. Now that the proceedings are initiated against the vehicles and as these proceedings are pending before the 1st respondent, I do not find any necessary for this Court to pronounce on the validity of the proceedings, at least at this stage. Therefore, I direct the 1st respondent to finalise the proceedings against the vehicles and other articles seized W.P (C) No. 281 of 2011 2 with notice to the petitioner and as expeditiously as possible, on the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. 3. In the meanwhile it will be open to the petitioner to apply for interim custody of the vehicles and other articles seized. It is directed that if such an application is filed, the 1st respondent will consider the same and pass orders incorporating sufficient safeguards as he deems necessary. Such orders shall be passed, at any rate, within ten days of making an application, producing a copy of this judgment and copy of the writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge W.P (C) No. 281 of 2011 3