Ismail M.P. vs The District Collector Collectorate, Ayyanthole, Thrissur 680003, Sub- Inspector of Police, Town East Police Station, Thrissur 680001 and The Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Office of The Revenue Divisional Officer Ayyanthole, Thrissur 680003

T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.—This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P4 order of confiscation passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Thrissur. Proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for alleged violation of the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act. It is averred in the writ petition that the vehicle was seized on 07.01.2011 while it was transporting sand from Karimpana kadavu to Cherplanchery. According to the petitioner, it is covered by a valid pass issued by the Panchayath namely, Ext.P1. The allegation raised against the petitioner is that there is no inter district pass to transport the sand. The petitioner is relying upon Ext.P2 circular issued by the Additional Chief Secretary directing that those vehicles carrying sand which do not possess any documents alone need be seized and it is pointed out that the seizure itself is illegal.

In Ext.P4, the finding is that on a perusal of the sand pass, it is clear that the pass was issued to transport sand from Karimpana (Thrithala Grama Panchayath) to Cherplachery Grama Panchayath. The vehicle was seized from Chempukavu in Thrissur and the party has not produced any inter district pass for transportation of the river sand.

Therefore, evidently, it is a case where the petitioner produced a pass to transport sand from Thrithala Grama Panchayath in Palakkad District to Cherplachery Grama Panchayath, which was not applicable at all. There is no document to support the inter district transport. Therefore, the contention raised by the petitioner that the assumed violation is only with regard to the route through which the transport was effected cannot be accepted. Once the petitioner is not having valid pass to transport the sand from these two places, the action taken by the Sub Divisional Magistrate directing confiscation of vehicle cannot be said to be wrong.

In the light of the above, there is nothing wrong in the order Ext.P4 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. As per the interim order dated 04.07.2012, this Court had directed the respondents to value the vehicle and file a report before the Court. Along with a memo dated 25.09.2012, the learned Government Pleader has produced a copy of the report from which it can be seen that the Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector, Regional Transport Office, Thrissur submitted a valuation report showing the value of the vehicle having registration No. KL-09-M- 9696 as Rs. 2 lakhs. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought for release of the vehicle on payment of the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs in instalments which is opposed by the learned Government Pleader. The petitioner has sought for easy instalments to clear the said amount after releasing the vehicle to him.

If the petitioner remits an amount of Rs. 1 lakh within a period of one month and furnishes sufficient security by way of immovable property for the balance amount which is free from encumbrance, to the satisfaction of the District Collector, the vehicle will be released on execution of the bond with two sureties and he will undertake not to transfer the vehicle or part with possession of the same till the remaining amount is paid. The remaining amount of Rs. 1 lakh will be remitted in two equal instalments within a further period of eight months starting from 01.12.2012. On remitting Rs. 1 lakh namely, the 1st instalment, the vehicle will be released to the petitioner after executing the bond and on depositing the balance amount as directed above, the security will be released.

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.