IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17515 of 2011(L) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. GOPINATHAN PILLAI B., S/O.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, ARCHANA, THOTTATHUM MURI, KUNNATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 2. MADHAVAN PILLAI, C/O.SASIDHARA KURUP, SASIMANDIRAM, THURUTHIKARA, KUNNATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 3. SULAIMAN RAWTHER, MULLOOR HOUSE, MANNADY P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA-691 530. 4. R.VELUSAMY, S/O.RANGASAMY, CHINNAPPANAYACKANPATTY, SUKURANPATTY P.O., NAMAKKAL DIST-637 206. 5. ARUMUGAM.D, S/O.DURAIRAJ, NO.16, ELANGO ADIGAL, MEENACHIPET, PONDICHERRY-605 009. 6. V.A.ALEX, S/O.ABRAHAM, KAMBAKODE, VAYAKKAL P.O., 691 548, (REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY SUBERKUTTY). BY ADV. SRI. S. ABDUL RAZZAK RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM-691 001. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KUNNATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM-690 540. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM-691 001. ...2/- WP(C).No. 17515 of 2011(L) -2- 4. GOVT. OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...3/- WP(C).No. 17515 of 2011(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF SEIZURE MAHAZAR. EXT.P2 : PHOTOCOPY OF TITLE DEED NO. 132/04 DATED 12-01-2004 1ST PETITIONER... EXT.P3 : PHOTOCOPY OF DEED NO. 20180 DATED 04.07.1981 2ND PETITIONER... EXT.P4 : PHOTOCOPY OF RESPONDENT'S ORDER NO. 1310/07/A DATED NIL ISSUED IN 2007 UNDER MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES... EXT.P5 : PHOTOCOPY OF CONSENT DATED 10-5-2007 FROM THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXT.P6 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10-2-2006 TO 1ST PETITIONER FROM BW FISH FARMER'S DA. EXT.P7 : PHOTOCOPY OF NOC FROM GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO 1ST PETITIONER FOR FISH FARMING... EXT.P8 : PHOTOCOPY OF 2ND RESPONDENT'S REPORT DATED 06-02-2007 TO TAHSILDAR... EXT.P8A : PHOTOCOPY OF 2ND RESPONDENT'S REPORT DATED 24-02-2009 TO 1ST RESPONDENT... EXT.P9 : PHOTOGRAPH OF EXHT.P2 AFTER SEIZURE... EXT.P10 : PHOTOGRAPH OF ADJACENT PORTIONS IN BLOCK NO. 16/641... EXT.P11 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE RE-SURVEY PLAN FOR PLOT NO. 641 IN BLOCK NO. 16.... RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.17515 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Petitioners submitted that on 20.4.2011, six Hitachi Hydraulic Excavators, description of which has been given in Ext.P1 mahazar, along with two motor pumps, were seized from them by the 3rd respondent. According to them the equipments were used for removing sludge and clay deposit from fish farms and that, without any justification, proceedings were initiated against them on the allegation that the aforesaid activity was in violation of the provisions contained in Act 28/2008. 2. It is stated that since then, the machineries and the motors mentioned above are in the custody of the 3rd respondent. According to the petitioners, despite applications made for exparting the proceedings, adjudication has not been completed by the 1st respondent. It is in this factual background, the writ petition has been filed challenging the above proceedings and also seeking W.P(C) No.17515 of 2011 2 release of the machineries and other equipments. 3. The question as to whether the activity in which the petitioners employed their equipments was one to which provisions of Act 28 of 2008 are applicable, is a question of fact which can be determined only by a process of adjudication to be conducted by the 1st respondent. Therefore, at this stage, it is premature for this Court to venture into the examination of the factual issues raised by the petitioner. 4. Be that as it may, I do not see any reason why the equipments seized from the petitioners shall be kept under detention any longer exposing these equipments to the vagaries of weather, causing loss to the petitioners. 5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with the following the directions: i) That the 1st respondent shall complete the adjudication pursuant to seizure of machineries and other equipments as per Ext.P1. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of W.P(C) No.17515 of 2011 3 eight weeks from the production of a copy of this judgment. ii) It is directed that on the production of this judgment the machineries and equipments detained from the petitioners shall be released by the 3rd respondent, pending finalisation of the proceedings as directed above. 6. It is made clear that, while releasing the machineries and equipments it will be open to the 3rd respondent to demand production of adequate security, which is deemed appropriate. 7. The release of the equipments shall be made at any rate within ten days from the production of the copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE W.P(C) No.17515 of 2011 4