This court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order confiscating a vehicle for sand transportation and directing the respondent to sell it to realize the penalty.
The writ petition is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/13TH KARTHIKA, 1938
WP(C).No. 8233 of 2010 (D)
PETITIONER(S):
SHERIFF, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMEDKUTTY, THARAYIL HOUSE, KATTAVETTUR, DESAMANGALAM, THRISSUR.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR.
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERUTHURUTHY POLICE STATION.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
msv/
WP(C).No. 8233 of 2010 (D)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
P1 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B7-42875/09 DTD.2.11.2009.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
Msv/
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
W.P.(C) No. 8233 of 2010
Dated this the 4th day of November, 2016
J U D G M E N T
1.This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings
of the 1st respondent, District Collector, under the Kerala Protection or River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001.
has been confiscated for transporting river sand without a valid permit, as per Ext.P1 order. The petitioner's case is that he has not violated any of the provisions of the Act. It has to be noted that the 1st respondent passed Ext.P1, after adverting to the relevant materials.
3.This Court, on 12.03.2010, passed the following order;
“There will be a direction to release the vehicle to the petitioner on his depositing half of the amount covered by Ext.P1 and on furnishing a bond for the remaining amount with two solvent sureties. The petitioner shall not encumber the vehicle or transfer the same to any third person and shall not cause any damage to the vehicle so as to reduce its value and utility.”
W.P.(C) No. 8233 of 2010
..2..
Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE
bka/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order confiscating the petitioner's vehicle and directing its sale to realize the penalty without requiring deposit was liable to be set aside.
SHERIFF
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR
THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERUTHURUTHY
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
