IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 8TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26034 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.SUBBAYYAN, DOOR NO.244, MAMANA, JELLIPARA P.O., MANNARCADU. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD - 678 581. 2. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, OTTAPPALAM - 679 101. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AGALI - 678 581. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. SR.GP SMT.M.J.RAJASHREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2011, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).26074/11, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26034 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OIF THE PETITIONER'S VEHICLE. EXT.P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 23-09-2011 EXT.P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 26-9-2011 EXT.P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26-9-2011. EXT.P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.289057 DATED 23-09-2011 (True copy) P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C)s.26034 & 26074/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 30th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioners claim to be the registered owners of lorries bearing registration Nos. KL-08/R-6235 and KL-11/X-6680. According to the petitioners, for execution of their work awarded by PWD, they purchased sand from Tamil Nadu through legal means and after paying tax, the same was brought to Palakkad District, when the respondents detained the vehicles on the allegation of violation of the provisions contained in the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2011. It is stated that there upon report has been made to the second respondent and that proceedings are pending finalization. 2. The case of the petitioners is that the sand being brought from outside the State, the provisions of the Act itself are inapplicable. Therefore petitioners have approached this Court. 3. Now that the proceedings have been initiated and the second respondent is seized of the vehicles, it is for the second respondent to conclude the adjudication proceedings in terms of Section 23 of W.P.(C).26034 & 26074/11 2 the aforesaid Act. This the second respondent shall do with notice to the petitioners and as expeditiously as possible. 4. In the meantime, it will be open to the petitioners to make application to the second respondent for interim custody of the vehicles in which event, orders thereon shall be passed by the second respondent, without any delay, in the light of the principles laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Shan C.T. v. State of Kerala [2010(3)KHC 333]. 5. Petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs