IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29055 of 2011(F) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- K.G.GIREESHKUMAR, KADAPLAKKAL, MATTAKKARA ROAD, AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM-686 002. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOKTTAYAM-686 001. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM-686 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MUHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.29055/2011 F APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DTD. 24/08/06 OF TIPPER LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-05/W 9194. P2: COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DTD. 19/03/2011 PREPAREDBY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE REPORT DTD. 31/05/2011 SUBMITTED BY A SENIOR CHEMIST FROM DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY. P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. NIL ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DTD. 5/08/2011 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE DTD. 12/09/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL. P7: COPY OF THE VALID PASS DTD. 19/03/2011 PASSED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY. P8: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 12/10/2011 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P9: COPY OF THE REMITTING THE AMOUNTS DUE TO THE BANK. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 29055 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the registered owner of a vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-05W-9194. Proceedings under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 were initiated which culminated Ext.P4 order of the Revenue Divisional Officer. By this order the vehicle was found to be liable for confiscation and the petitioner was given freedom to redeem the same on payment of its value. Against this order the petitioner filed Ext.P5 revision before the District Collector and it was rejected by Ext.P8 order dated 12.10.2011. It is challenging these proceedings this writ petition is filed. 2. Admittedly the statute itself provides for appellate remedy u/s 23(c) of the Act. Therefore it is for the petitioner to resort to the statutory remedy of appeal. W.P.(C) No. 29055 OF 2011 -:2:- 3. However the counsel for the petitioner sought release of the vehicle on interim custody basis. As far as this request of the petitioner is concerned, such a direction can be given only in situations where statutory authority is seized of by the proceedings against the vehicle. In this case no such proceedings are pending and therefore no direction as sought for can be given. Therefore this writ petition is disposed of without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to appeal under Section 23(c) of the Act and for seeking interim custody of the vehicle. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-