HIRSHAD v. THE TAHSILDAR
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.-----------------------------W.P(C) No.27883 of 2009-E ------------------------------Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009.J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.P.M.Ziraj, the learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner and Sri.P.N.Santhosh, the learned Government Pleaderappearing for the respondents. 2.The petitioner claims that he is the owner of a lorry bearingregistration No.KL-10-U-7664. The said vehicle was seized by thesecond respondent Sub Inspector of Police, on 16.9.2009, on theallegation that it was used to transport river sand without a valid passand produced before the third respondent. The petitioner submits thatseeking interim custody of the vehicle he had submitted Ext.P1representation dated 17.9.2009 before the District Collector, Malappuram. The grievance voiced by the petitioner in this writ petitionis that till date, orders have not been passed on the request made by himin Ext.P1. In this writ petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ in thenature of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the vehicleto him. 3. A learned Single Judge of this Court has in Subramanian V.State of Kerala (2009(1) KLT 77) while upholding the constitutionalvalidity of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 held that the District Collector has the power to direct W.P(C) No.27883 of 2009-E : 2 :release of any vehicle which is seized and produced before him, by way ofinterim custody. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that theDistrict Collector should have considered the request made by thepetitioner for interim custody of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-10-U-7664 and passed orders thereon. I accordingly dispose of this writpetition with the following directions:i)The District Collector, Malappuram shall within seven daysfrom the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of thisjudgment pass orders granting interim custody of the vehicle to him onsuch terms and conditions as he may deem fit to impose.ii)The District Collector shall pass final orders in theproceedings initiated by him under the Kerala Protection of River Banksand Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and the rules framedthereunder within three months from such date after affording thepetitioner and the registered owner a reasonable opportunity of beingheard. The District Collector shall pass an order giving reasons insupport of his conclusions and shall communicate a copy thereof to thepetitioner expeditiously. Sd/-P.N.RAVINDRANJUDGE //True Copy//PA to Judgeab
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Removal of Sand Act, 2001.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 06 Oct 2009. The bench was P N RAVINDRAN.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.