IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2010 / 7TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19858 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- SMT.ANITHA, AGED 36 YEARS, W/O.SHAJI, 7/219, BLOCK NO.646, THIRD CAMP, BALAGRAM.P.O, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.VIJU THOMAS SMT.M.MEENA JOHN RESPONDENT: --------------- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, EXCISE DIVISION OFFICE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI. BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.19858 of 2010 --------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of an autorickshaw with register No.KL-37-4468. The vehicle was taken into custody on 11.6.2009 alleging offences under Sections 55(a) and (i) of the Abkari Act, for carrying more than three litres of permitted quantity of IMFL. 2. The grievance raised by the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that without serving a copy of the order of confiscation, steps are taken to auction the vehicle. 3. Exhibit P2 is the application submitted by the petitioner seeking for interim custody of the vehicle. It is submitted by the petitioner that he had entrusted the matter to an Advocate and she was kept in the dark about the proceedings leading to the confiscation. 4. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the order of confiscation which was passed on 17.3.2010 by the Deputy Commissioner, Idukki was sent by registered post to the petitioner with A/D card on 24.3.2010. W.P.(C)No.19858/10 -2- But, neither the registered Thapal nor the A/D card has returned so far. A communication has been sent to the Post Master, Head Post Office, Thodupuzha requesting to inform whether the confiscation order of the vehicle was delivered to the petitioner. It is also mentioned that the petitioner has submitted an application dated 18.6.2010 seeking for release of the vehicle on deposit of the value of the vehicle. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has got a right to challenge the order of confiscation before the appellate authority and a direction may be issued to furnish a copy of the order, in the light of the fact that so far the same has not been served. Going by the written instructions received by the learned Government Pleader also it is clear that the copy of the order sent through registered post has not been served on the petitioner and the A/D card has not been returned so far. Therefore, for a proper determination of the matter, it is only just and proper that a direction is issued to the respondent herein to furnish a copy of the order to the petitioner on the petitioner approaching the respondent. Therefore the petitioner can appear before the respondent and a copy of the W.P.(C)No.19858/10 -3- order will be furnished on usual terms to the petitioner. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order, it is upto the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy by way of appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn