IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2008 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1930 W.P(C).No. 9471 of 2008(C) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- B.A.KASIM, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.B.ADUKKA, ARIKKADI KADAVATH, P.O.KUMBALA, KASARAGOD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 9471 OF 2008 C = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 31st March, 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext. P2. Ext. P2 is an order passed by the District Collector exercising his power under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Rules, 2002. The basis of Ext. P2 is that the pass relied on by the petitioner for legitimising the transport of river sand was a fabricated one. It is also seen that a fine of Rs.20,000/- was levied and the same has been remitted by the petitioner. 2. The case was adjourned for the instructions of the learned Govt. Pleader and it is submitted before me today that at the time of seizure, the driver was not in possession of the pass and that during the course of the adjudication Ext. P1 pass was produced. When the genuineness of Ext. P1 pass was doubted, the same was referred to the Geologist for his report and that the Geologist confirmed that the pass was a fabricated one. W.P.(C) No.9471 OF 2008 -2- 3. It is this very same pass that is produced in this writ petition as Ext. P1. If, as a matter of fact what is sought for legitimising the transport was Ext. P1 and the authority himself had confirmed that the pass was a fabricated one, I cannot find fault with the 2nd respondent in concluding that the transportation of river sand was unauthorised. I also notice that the fine amount that is imposed is a reasonable one and the same has been remitted by the petitioner. In view of this, I do not find any justification to entertain a challenge against the impugned order. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-