IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2011 / 1ST POUSHA 1933 WP(C).No. 34696 of 2011(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ RAJAN, CHERUPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALAMCODE P.O., CHANGARAMKULAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 576. (REGISTERED OWNER OF VEHICLE NO.KL-54-8749). BY ADV. SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH), SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE PONNANI MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, PONNANI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 586. 2. THE PORT CONSERVATOR, PORT & SHIPPING OFFICE, PONNANI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 586. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. R1 BY ADV. MR.MOHAMMED IQUABAL. R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.M.J. RAJASREE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 34696 of 2011(J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE NO.KL-54-8749 OWNED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE VEHICLE PASS USUALLY ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE CASH MEMORANDUM ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT IN WP(C) NO. 23810/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).34696/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Main prayer sought in the writ petition reads as follows:- “Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ directing 1st and 2nd respondents that while issuing passes for transportation of sand and other drudged out materials from Ponnani port to the vehicle owned by the petitioner bearing registration number KL 54 8749, not to impose restrictions in such a manner that such materials shall not be transported outside the limits of Malappuram District. 2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality submits that, in W.P.(C).30683/2010, there was a direction issued by this Court to the effect that the sand from the Ponnani Port should be transported only within the Malappuram District and that it was therefore that such a condition was insisted. It is stated that when that writ petition was disposed of, such a condition has not been retained. On this ground, the Municipality W.P.(C).34696/11 2 submits that it is now free to issue passes enabling transportation of the sand from the Ponnani Port to places outside Malappuram District. 3. Now that such a submission has been made on behalf of the second respondent, which is the authority to issue the transportation passes, it is not necessary for this Court to examine the contentions raised by the petitioner on merits. 4. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the first respondent to issue passes permitting transportation of the sand in question to places outside Malappuram District. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs