IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7112 of 2009(H) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- ANILKUMAR.K., S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, KALARIKKAL HOUSE, AMARAMBALAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REG.No.KL-12-6620 TRACTOR). BY MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU, ADVOCATE. MR.P.VENUGOPAL, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY MR.P.N. SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.7112 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P6, an order passed by the 2nd respondent finding that the Tractor bearing Regn.No.KL- 12/6620, of which the petitioner is the registered owner, was involved in the unauthorised transportation of river sand and on that basis, the petitioner was ordered to remit Rs.40,000/-as the value of the vehicle and Rs.50,000/- as fine. 2. Although several contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner impugning the validity of Ext.P6, in view of the findings therein, I am not in a position to accept the contentions. However, the complaint regarding the incompetency of the 2nd respondent to levy fine as done in Ext.P6, deserves acceptance. In view of the fact that the 2nd respondent is incompetent to do so, Ext.P6 order passed by the 2nd respondent to the extent Rs.50,000/- ordered to be remitted as fine will stand set aside. It is directed that if the petitioner remits the value of the vehicle as fixed in Ext.P6 to the River Management Fund, the vehicle in question will be released. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg