SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Ker) 830

BELLUR NARAYANASWAMY SRIKRISHNA, G.SIVARAJAN
Sanjayan – Appellant
Versus
Tahsildar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

B. N. Srikrishna, C. J.

1. Appeals admitted. Notices made returnable forthwith. Respondents in all three appeals waive service through learned counsel. By consent, appeals called out for hearing and heard.

2. In all these three appeals the vehicles of the appellants were seized on the allegation that they were illegally transporting sand from the river banks. In W. A. No. 1286 and 1287 of 2002 by Ext. P2 order issued by the Sub Collector, Adoor, who is also the Revenue Divisional Officer, the appellants were informed that their lorries had been seized for unauthorised transporting of river sand and a sum of Rs. 25,000/- was imposed as fine for transporting river sand without any valid pass. The Tahsildar, Kozhencherry was directed to collect the sum of Rs. 25,000/- as fine and release the lorries after unloading the river sand from where it was collected. In W. A. No. 1330 of 2002, by Ext. P4 order made by Tahsildar, Mallappally, purportedly under the Mines and Minerals (Development Regulation) Act, 1957 read with R.60A of the Kerala Minor Minerals Concession Act, 1967, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- was levied as maximum penalty with a direction for re-depositing the sand from the lo







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top