IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2011 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10852 of 2011(F) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- K.VISHWANATHAN, KOICKALETHU, MUTHUKULAM,KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR, SRI.A.SALINI LAL. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA-690 501. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION KAREELAKULANGARA, ALAPPUZHA-690 513. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2011 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.10814 OF 2011 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.10852 OF 2011(F) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed alleging that the petitioner's vehicles bearing registration Nos.KL-04-R-1811 and KL-04-P-5233 were seized by the 2nd respondent on 29.3.2011. According to the petitioners, at the time of seizure the vehicles were involved in transportation of red earth for which no permit is required and therefore, the seizure of the vehicles is totally unjustified. It is also his case that he sought release of the vehicle by filing Ext.P4 application before the first respondent and that orders have not been passed. It is with these allegations that this writ petition is filed. 2. As at present, according to the petitioner the vehicles are in the custody of the first respondent and the seizure was on the allegation that the vehicles were involved in the transportation of red earth without any permit. Irrespective of the correctness of the allegation, since the first respondent seized of the matter it is for the first respondent to finalize the proceedings against the vehicles. This the first respondent shall do as expeditiously as WPC.No.10852 /2011 :2 : possible with notice to the petitioner. 3. Pending finalization of the proceedings as above, it is directed that first respondent will consider Ext.P4 application made by the petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle. It is directed that on such consideration if the first respondent order release of the vehicle it will also be open to the first respondent to impose such conditions as he deems proper to impose. An order shall be passed on the production of a copy of the judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the Ist respondent for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/