IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5993 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUJEEB REHMAN K.P., S/O.KUNJHIMOHAMMED, AGED 30 YEARS, KOLAKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, THRIKKANAPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. (OWNER AND POSSESSOR OF KL-10-R-5124). BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM. 2. DY.TAHSILDAR, PONNANI TALUK, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM-DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.5993 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P3 order passed by the District Collector with regard to the release of the vehicle seized for illegal transportation of sand, this writ petition has been filed. The said order has been passed evidently in the light of the direction issued by this Court in W.P.No.3059 of 2010. 2. As a condition for release of the vehicle, the petitioner is asked to provide a demand draft of Rs.2,00,000/-. 3. The petitioner has pointed out that two of the conditions are objectionable and are illegal. The first one is that he will not transport the sand even with a valid pass during the pendency of the proceedings. Second one is that he will not ply the vehicle within the limits of the concerned Taluk before the finalisation of the proceedings. It is contended that these two conditions cannot be imposed as it will affect the fundamental right of the petitioner to carry on his avocation. 4. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. Going by condition No.7 it is clear that the value of the vehicle has not been fixed so far. Therefore the direction to W.P.(C)No.5993 of 2010 2 remit Rs.2,00,000/- cannot be supported. Apart from that conditions 1 and 2 provided therein also cannot be supported in law. There cannot be any restriction with regard to the use of the vehicle of the petitioner like the one now imposed as also not to use the vehicle for other purposes within the area of the Taluk. Therefore Ext.P3 is set aside. The first respondent will pass a fresh order after getting valuation of the vehicle from competent authorities within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The order will be passed in terms of the directions issued in [ District Collector, Malappuram Vs. Abdul Kasim (2010 (1) KLT short note 31 (Writ Appeal No.2578 of 2009). The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE skj