IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31111 of 2011(L) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. ANEESH KUMAR, S/O. BALAKRISHNA PANICKER, THACHAZATH HOUSE, NEDUMPARA P.O, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. ABHILASH, S/O BALAKRISHNA PANICKAR, THACHAZATH HOUSE, NEDUMPARA P.O, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. THOMAS SEBASTIAN, S/O P.M. DEVASSIYA, AGED 42 YEARS, PADIYARA, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CHANGANASSERY. BY ADV. SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB, SRI.EBY AUGUSTINE. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 645. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERINGARA, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 645. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA-686 121. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PULIKKEZHU POLICE STATION, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 645. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.MOHAMMED SHAH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 31111 of 2011(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF IST PETITIONER. DTD.16.04.2011 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT OF IST PETITIONER DTD. 11.04.2011. EXT.P3 TRUE COY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE IST PETITIONER DTD. 06.08.09. EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT OF THE IST PETITIONER DTD.14.08.2009. EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DTD. 13.07.2010. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT DTD. 09.06.2010. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DTD. 28.02.2007 EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE GOODS CARRIAGE PERMIT DTD. 02.03.2007. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE DATE BANK ENTRY CONCERNED VILLAGE DTD. 04.02.2011. EXT.P10 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P11 COPY OF THE MAHAZAR OF 1ST PETITIONER'S VEHICLE DATED 03/10/2011. EXT.P12 COPY OF THE MAHAZAR PREPARED IN RELATION TO CONFISCATION OF 2ND PETITIONER DATED 03/10/2011 EXT.P13 COPY OF THE MAHAZAR PREPARED IN RELATION TO CONFISCATION OF 3RD PETITIONER DATED 03/10/2011. EXT.P14 COPY OF THE MAHAZAR PREPARED IN RELATION TO CONFISCATION OF PETITIONERS DATED 03/10/2011. EXT.P15 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11/10/2011 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P16 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02/11/2011 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 31111 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T What is under challenge is Ext.P16. Petitioners are registered owners of vehicles covered by Exts.P1 to P4. Proceedings were initiated against the vehicles in question under Act 28 of 2008. Those proceedings are now pending before the first respondent. In the meanwhile applications were made for interim custody of the vehicles and by Ext.P16, interim custody of the vehicles have been given subject to the conditions mentioned in the order. It is this order which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel has raised various contentions regarding the validity of the proceedings initiated. But having regard to the fact that the proceedings are still pending before the statutory authority and the authority is yet to consider these contentions, I think it is premature for the petitioners to raise the plea at this stage before this W.P.(C) No. 31111 OF 2011 :2 : court. 3. In so far as Ext.P16 order is concerned, the objection stated by the petitioners is about the conditions imposed by the first respondent. A reading of the order show that these conditions were imposed based on the principles laid down by the Full Bench decision of this Court in Shan C.T. v. State of Kerala [2010(3)KHC 333] which deals with cases arising under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. In my view, there is nothing irregular in imposing those conditions in Ext.P16 order issued accepting the request of the petitioners for interim custody of the vehicles. For these reasons, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the first respondent. Hence this petition is dismissed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge