IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9608 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.THOMAS,S/O.KUNJUVAREETH,3/155, KANNAMPUZHA HOUSE,CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.D.SHAJAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIAL(G)DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,THRISSUR. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHALAKUDY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.9608/2010-A ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is the registered owner and in possession of a lorry bearing Registration No.KL-8-Z-6497. On 21/02/2010, the said vehicle was intercepted by the Sub Inspector of Police and was seized alleging illicit transportation of river sand. A crime was accordingly registered by the police under Sections 17(4), 20, 21 read with Section 23 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. Ext.P2 is the copy of the F.I.R. It is the case of the petitioner that an empty vehicle was taken into custody from the residence, by the third respondent. The petitioner is transporting river sand only as per the provisions of the above Act with sufficient documents and, hence it is contended that the vehicle is not at all liable for confiscation. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to release the above vehicle to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has made a request to the second respondent for interim custody of the vehicle in the light of the decision of this Court in Subramanian v. State of Kerala [2009 (1) KLT 77). Ext.P3 is the copy of the said W.P.(C). No.9608/2010 -:2:- request. Aggrieved by the delay in disposal of the said application, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 4. There will be a direction to the second respondent to take a decision on Ext.P3 within a period of seven days from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, in the light of the well settled principles laid down by this Court in various decisions and, on such terms and conditions which he deems fit to impose. The matter will be considered in accordance with law. There will be a further direction to the second respondent to pass final orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the petitioner and after considering the pleas raised by the petitioner, on merits. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms