IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2009 / 6TH BHADRA 1931 WA.No. 1938 of 2009 --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.21293/2009 Dated 13/08/2009 .................... APPELLANT / PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------- SULAIMAN, S/O.BEERAN, AGED 51 YEARS, MANNINGAL HOUSE, ALINGAL, TRIPRANGOD VILLAGE, TIROOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, TIRUR. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 3. TRIPRANGOD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRIPRANGOD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No.1938 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of August 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. This writ appeal is filed challenging the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.21293/09, dated 13th August, 2009. 2. The vehicle bearing Reg.No.Kl-08Z/9485 of the appellant/petitioner was seized for the violation of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2002. It is admitted that the pass which was issued to the appellant/petitioner shows the time for removal therein as 2.55 p.m. But on 24-2-2009, the vehicle was seized with sand at about 4.20 p.m. as the permitted time for collection of sand and delivery is only till 3 p.m. As per the directions issued by the learned Single Judge, District Collector quantified the amount payable by the owner of the vehicle and directed the appellant/petitioner to remit an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- towards River Management Fund for getting released of the vehicle. 3. Learned Single Judge rejected Ext.P3, explanation offered by the watchman of Colony Kadavu in Tripangod, since it was found to be W.A.No.1938 OF 2009 :: 2 :: false and contrary to explanation of appellant himself. In fact the District Collector has noted that even the watchman of Kadavu is in collusion with the appellant/petitioner. The learned Single Judge, noticing all these aspects, has rightly held that the alleged violation against appellant/petitioner is proved. Since it is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the valuation is based on no material, in our view, the learned Single Judge was justified in directing the District Collector to pass fresh order fixing the value of the vehicle and quantify the amount which the petitioner has to remit. We do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order passed either by the District Collector or by the learned Single Judge. Hence, the appeal is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. (S.R.BANNURMATH) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE jes/vku