Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17975
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 10865 OF 2024 PETITIONER:
MUBARAK O AGED 40 YEARS S/O KUNJAHAMMAD O, ORAVIL HOUSE, PADINJARANGADI, KAPPUR, ANGADI PO, PALAKKAD DT. (REGISTERED OWNER OF OPEN TIPPER VEHICLE NO. KL-52-Q-9646), PIN - 679552 BY ADVS.
SHOBY K.FRANCIS AGI SHOBY RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER [SHO]
VADAKKEKKAD POLICE STATION, VADAKKEKKAD PO, THRISSUR DT., PIN - 679562
2 THE GEOLOGIST OFFICE OF THE GEOLOGIST, DEPT. OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, CHEMBUKKAVU P O, THRISSUR, PIN - 680020
3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL LANE, AYYANTHOLE PO, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
4 ABOOBACKAR AGED 80 YEARS S/O HYDRU HAJI, KONJHATH HOUSE, KADIKKAD, PUNNAYOORKULAM PO, THRISSUR DT., PIN - 679561 OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP - DEEPA NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
VIJU ABRAHAM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.10865 of 2024 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of March, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P2 mahazar and all further proceedings pursuant to the same.
2. It is averred that the petitioner is the registered owner of a goods carriage tipper vehicle bearing Reg. No.KL-52-Q-9646 and the same was seized by the 1st respondent alleging illegal transportation of ordinary earth. The petitioner relying on Ext.P2 mahazar would submit that the 1st respondent has no conclusive knowledge as regards the nature of the property and only stated that the vehicle has been used for filling up of a land which has likeliness of a paddy land.
2. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that the said property was found to be 'Nanja' and therefore, the petitioner has violated the provision of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act. It is also submitted that the seizure has been reported by the 1st respondent to the Revenue Divisional Officer.
The learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the fact that it is a paddy land. In view of the above, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:
As the seizure was reported to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thrissur, the same shall be forwarded to the 3rd respondent forthwith, before whom the petitioner shall file appropriate application seeking interim custody of the vehicle. If any application is filed by the petitioner as directed, the same shall be heard and disposed of by the 3rd respondent within a period of one week from the date of filing of that application, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent. It is made clear that the 3rd respondent while considering the matter as directed above, shall also ascertain and be satisfied that the property involved is a paddy land .
