Collector did not advert to the said aspect which according to me is a relevant factor in determining whether there was avoidable delay in transporting river sand. Further, the District Collector has not in Ext.P4 order stated the point of time at which the vehicle was intercepted and seized. In any case, it is evident that as the main leaf of the vehicle was broken, the vehicle could not have been driven thereafter, carrying a full load of sand. The District Collector has in Ext.P4 also stated that the petitioner has not explained the reason why he did not inform the authorities that his vehicle had suffered a break down. Apart from the fact that there is no rule or stipulation regarding that aspect of the matter or the authority to whom a report in that regard has to be given, it is evident from Ext.P3 that this aspect was brought to the notice of the District Collector. The vehicle was seized on 4.5.2009. The Police officer who seized the vehicle could have ascertained whether the main leaf had broken as claimed by the petitioner even on that day. Ever since 4.5.2009, the vehicle is in the custody of the Police. From the materials on record, it is evident that there was no ground to proceed against the petitioner's
