IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2009 / 1ST MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 345 of 2009(N) ------------------------ PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. C.CHENTHAMARA, S/O CHELLAN,CHUNAYAKKADU, MATHUR, THACHAMKAD.P.O, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. K.PRAMOD, S/O KRISHNAN, MANALURKALAM, KANNADI.PO, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.SATHEESH RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, ALATHUR. 3. THE S.I.OF POLICE, KUZHALMANNAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 345 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners submit that the Sub Inspector of Police seized two vehicles bearing registration nos. KL-9/S-6628 and KRP-6021 on the allegation that these vehicles were engaged in the unauthorised transportation of river sand. Applications were made by them to the first respondent for interim custody of the vehicles and the first respondent passed Exhibit P2 order directing the release of the vehicle on certain conditions. Accordingly, the first petitioner deposited Rs.50,000/- vide two demand drafts of Rs.25,000/- each and the second respondent deposited Rs.30,000/-. 2. While so, the petitioners approached the Magistrate and obtained Exts. P4 and P5 orders directing the release of the vehicle. It is stated that in pursuance to these orders, vehicles were released and therefore the deposit made in compliance of the Collector's order, is liable to be refunded. Claiming refund of the amount, petitioners filed Exhibit P6 representation to the first respondent and orders have not been passed on that application. In the circumstances, petitioners seek a direction to the first respondent to refund the amount deposited by them. W.P.(C) No. 345/2009 2 3. On the other hand, it is pointed out by the learned Government Pleader that the Collector has passed final order on 14/10/2008 and therefore the amount deposited by the petitioner is liable to be appropriated towards the amount due in terms of final order by the Collector. 4. If any amount is due from the petitioners, the same can be released out of the deposit made by the petitioners and it is a matter for the District Collector to decide. Since Exhibit P6 representation filed by the petitioners seeking refund is pending before the the first respondent, it is for the first respondent to consider the matter and take a decision thereon. Therefore, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider and take a decision on Exhibit P6 representation dated 1/11/2008 filed by the petitioner, with notice to them as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within four weeks of production of copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm