Dismissed

Praveen T.V. v. the District Collector, Ernakulam

Kerala HC21 Jul 2015WP(C)/350/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order imposing a fine under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001, asserting it was issued without service of notice. The court dismissed the challenge, upheld the fine, and allowed recovery of the balance amount.

What did the court decide?

The respondent authority is entitled to recover the balance fine of Rs.25,000/-.

Praveen T.V. Vs the District Collector, Ernakulam — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2015/30TH ASHADHA, 1937

¶5

W.P(C)No.350 of 2010(P)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

PRAVEEN, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, 1/297, THATTUPARA HOUSE, OKKAL, KOOVAPADY PERUMBAVOOR (OWNER OF A MINI LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-8-S-7237)

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.

¶11

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KALADY POLICE STATION.

¶12

BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.S.JAMAL

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.07.2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

[P.T.O]

¶15

W.P(C)No.350 of 2010(P)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶18

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PASS DATED 23.04.2009 ISSUED BY A SAND DEALER TO THE VEHICLE OF THE PETITIONER.

¶19

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 15.5.2009 IN W.P.(C)NO.13707 OF 2009

¶20

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.8.2009 PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT

¶21

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 11.12.2009 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶22

EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.12.2009 IN W.P. (C)NO.36446 THIS HONOURABLE COURT

¶23

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: Nil

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

PtK/

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J

- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 350 of 2010

¶29

¶30

Dated this the 21^st day of July, 2015

¶31

The petitioner is aggrieved with Ext.P4 which is an

¶32

order passed under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. Mulcted with a fine of Rs.50,000/-, the petitioner had obtained an interim order for release, on execution of a bond to the satisfaction of the 1^st respondent. The petitioner mainly challenges Ext.P4 on the ground that the same has been issued without notice to him.

¶33

However, it is to be noticed that Ext.P4 is subsequent

¶34

to Ext.P3 order. Earlier the District Collector had considered the

¶35

issue, and a reading of Ext.P3 would indicate that on the petitioner's request, no confiscation proceedings were initiated, but, however, a fine of Rs.1 lakh was imposed. Subsequently, on

¶36

WPC.No.350/2010

¶37

: 2 :

¶38

non-consideration of an application for release of the vehicle, the petitioner had approached this Court, and this Court directed reconsideration of the issue. The District Collector again reconsidered the issue and reduced the fine to Rs.50,000/-. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order. Since the petitioner submits that Rs.25,000/- has already been paid, the respondent authority would be entitled to recover the balance amount from the petitioner by appropriate proceedings, if the petitioner does not pay the balance amounts within two months from today. The respondent authority would be entitled to either recover the money by enforcing the bond executed by the petitioner or by seizure of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-8-S-7237.

¶39

Writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶40

Sd/(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)

¶41

jma

¶42

//true copy//

¶43

P.A to Judge

Praveen T.V. v. the District Collector, Ernakulam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen T.V. v. the District Collector, Ernakulam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saji Agro Food Industries Vs Kerala State Civil Supplies Corpn. Ltd.

O.v.Shanuras Vs Secretary, Higher Education Department

Ammukutty Amma Vs State of Kerala

Anoop Vs Vijayasankar

Sakkariya Vs State of Kerala

Damodaran Vs Regional Survey Joint Director & Ors.