High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition disposed/closed; petitioner’s cha...

Suresh Kumar.K v. The District Collector, Malappuram and The Revenue Divisional Officer, Perinthalmanna

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.14122 of 2019
Neutral Citation:null

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Anil K. Narendran
Judgment Date
2019-06-17
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge Ext.R2(b) before an appropriate forum; Ext.R2(a) confiscation order remains the basis for action and interim custody is subordinate to the confiscation framework.
Final Disposition
Writ petition disposed/closed; petitioner’s challenge to Ext.R2(b) may be pursued in an appropriate forum; no relief granted regarding Ext.R2(a).

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Suresh Kumar.K

Respondents

  • The District Collector, Malappuram
  • The Revenue Divisional Officer, Perinthalmanna

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Shri. T.K. Ajith Kumar

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri K.P. Harish, Senior Government Pleader

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the confiscation of a motor lorry under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The petitioner, Suresh Kumar.K, is the registered owner of lorry KL-59/G-2741, seized on 21 August 2014 by the District Sand Squad for alleged river sand violations. He seeks a mandamus directing the 2nd respondent Revenue Divisional Officer to release the vehicle as per Ext.P1, an order dated 15 March 2019 issued by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Malappuram. The 2nd respondent had by Ext.R2(a) dated 16 January 2018 confiscated the vehicle, listed among about 570 vehicles in a Gazette publication. The counter affidavit contends that the owner did not respond to trial notices and did not file any revision petition under Section 23B; it also notes Ext.R2(b), a report submitted to the JFCM Court. The court notes that Ext.R2(a) stands and that if the petitioner is aggrieved, he may challenge it in appropriate proceedings. It is further noted that interim custody granted by the JFCM in CMP No.506/2019 remains subordinate to the confiscation order. The petition is ultimately closed, while preserving the petitioner’s right to challenge Ext.R2(b) elsewhere, without prejudice. The court refers to the Apex Court’s view in General Insurance Council v. State of Andhra Pradesh for context.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001Section 23A(2) (first proviso)Section 23A(4)Section 23(B)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Principles of natural justice

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner seeks release of the seized vehicle under Ext.P1 and contends Ext.R2(a) confiscation order violates natural justice, including non-publication in a Kannur-circulating newspaper; he prays for mandamus to release the vehicle and reserves right to challenge the order in appropriate proceedings.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that Ext.R2(a) confiscation is valid under the Act, the owner did not respond to notices or file revision petitions, and interim custody orders are subject to the confiscation. They rely on the Gazette notification and a 2018 confiscation list, with Ext.R2(b) submitted to the JFCM Court; the matter is pending in appropriate proceedings.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
General Insurance Council v. State of Andhra Pradesh(2010) 6 SCC 768Mentioned OnlyCited to provide contextual background for the confiscation policy; the court notes the decision but does not apply it as binding precedent in the present case.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Suresh Kumar.K v. The District Collector, Malappuram and The Revenue Divisional Officer, Perinthalmanna and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1941** ## **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019** ## **PETITIONER:** **SURESH KUMAR.K, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.RAJU K, CHERIKKALIL (H), ERAMAM.P.O, PAYYANNOOR, THALIPARAMBU, KANNUR DT.** **BY ADV. SHRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION UP HILL(PO), MALAPPURAM DT. PIN-676 505** **2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA(PO), MALAPPURAM DT. PIN-679 321.** ## **SRI K.P. HARISH - SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019 2** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner who is a registered owner of a lorry bearing Registration No.KL-59/G-2741, which was seized on 21.08.2014 at 11.30 p.m. by the District Sand Squad, Malappuram, alleging violation of the provisions under the the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent Revenue Divisional Officer to release the vehicle, as directed in Ext.P1 office memorandum dated 15.03.2019 issued by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram, whereby the 2nd respondent is directed to release the said vehicle to the petitioner. 2. On 22.05.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader sought time to get instructions. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2 nd respondent, opposing the relief sought for in this writ petition. Along with the said counter affidavit, Ext.R2(a) order dated 16.01.2018, which has been published in the official Gazette on 20.03.2018, is placed on record. Paragraph 4, 5 and 6 of the said **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019 3** counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent read thus; “ 4. It is submitted that as per trial notice No.S2/8380/16 dated 04.10.2017 of this office published in Mathrubhumi daily and Madhyamam dated on 10.12.2017 instruction had given to the owners of the vehicles which were seized for illegal sand mining to submit show cause statement within 20 days for not taking actions related to confiscation. The owner of the vehicle No.KL-59-G-2741 had not appeared and submitted any explanation/reasons for not confiscating the vehicle. As per confiscation order of 670 vehicles published in Kerala Gazette 7th volume dated 20.03.2018 and published in Deshabhimani Daily dated 05.04.2018, the vehicle No.KL-59-G-2741 is included as SI.No.369 in the advertisement. True copy of the confiscation order No.S2/8380/2016 dated 16.01.2018 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R2(a). Instruction had given to the vehicle owners to submit revision petition of any within 15 days before District Collector, Malappuram as per Section 23(B) of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act 2001. But the owner of the vehicle did not submit any petition as instructed. 5. It is submitted that the vehicle owner of KL59/G-2741 submitted a petition CMP No.506/2019 before the Hon'ble JFCM Court Malappuram on 06.02.2019. He stated that he had used the vehicle for legal sand transportation and the sand squad seized the vehicle by mistake. Bu the vehicle No.KL59/G-2741 was seized on 21.08.2014 at 11.30 p.m. **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019 4** from the Chaliyar river since there is no permission to extract and transport river sand before 7.00 a.m. and after 4.00 p.m. It is clear that the vehicle was used for illegal river sand mining and transportation. it is a clear violation of provisions of the Kerala protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The owner of the vehicle No.KL-59/G-2741 had not submitted any petitions before this office for trial notice No.S2-8380/16 dated 04.10.2017. He did not submit any petition before District Collector Malappuram against the confiscation order dated 20.03.2018 of Kerala Gazette and published in Newspaper dated 05.04.2018. 6. It is submitted that the owner of the vehicle No.KL-59/G-2741 misrepresented the Hon'ble JFCM Court Malappuram in his petition CMP No.506/2019 dated 06.02.2019. Hon'ble JFCM Court Malappuram ordered to release vehicle No.KL-59/G-2741 in interim custody to the owner and the same was intimated to the 2nd respondent by Ext.P1 official memorandum dated 15.03.2019 in CMP No.506/19. The petitioner has not produced the order in CMP No.506/19 before this Hon'ble Court. The petitioner had been given many chances to furnish his arguments against the confiscation proceeding but he did not respondent to any of the notice and hence it is clear that the petitioner had no valid reason to furnish against confiscation. As per 1st proviso to Section 23A(2) of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act 2001 any order passed by the **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019 5** Judicial Magistrate regarding interim custody will be subject to the orders of confiscation made by the Sub Divisional Magistrate under Sub Section (4) of Section 23A of the Act. Hence the confiscated vehicle cannot be released in interim custody s per law. Hence a detailed report has been submitted before Hon'ble JFCM Court Malappuram for appropriate order as per No.S1/11301/14 dated 29.04.2019 if this office, and this case is still pending in JFCM Court. True copy of the report submitted before Hon'ble JFCM Court Malappuram is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R2(b).” 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 5. The petitioner's vehicle, which was seized on 21.08.2014, alleging transportation of river sand in violation of the provisions under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 and the rules made thereunder, has already been confiscated by Ext.R2(a) order dated 16.01.2018 of the 2nd respondent, which has been published in the Kerala Gazette dated 20.03.2018. The said order relates to confiscation of about 570 vehicles, which were seized for illegal transportation of river sand, and were lying at different places. Such a course has been adopted by the 2nd respondent, taking note of the judgment of the Apex Court in **General** **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019 6** ## **Insurance Council v. State of Andhra Pradesh [(2010) 6 SCC 768]** 6. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner has made available for the perusal of this Court a copy of the report dated 26.02.2019 of the 2nd respondent to the Assistant Public Prosecutor in the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram. 7. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader would point out that the 2nd respondent has already submitted Ext.R2(b) report dated 29.04.2019 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Malappuram explaining the facts and circumstances. 8. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court finds that if the petitioner is feeling aggrieved by Ext.R2(a) order of confiscation, it is for him to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that Ext.R2(a) order is one issued in violation of the principles of natural justice, inasmuch as the publication of notice referred to in Ext.R2(a) order was not made in a newspaper having circulation in Kannur district, where he is residing. Without expressing anything as to the aforesaid contention **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019 7** raised by the petitioner, this writ petition is closed, without prejudice to the right, if any, of the petitioner to challenge Ext.R2(b) before appropriate forum, raising appropriate contentions. **Sd/-** **ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **JUDGE** sru **WP(C).No.14122 of 2019 8** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM DATED 15.3.2019 ISSUED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, MALAPPURAM, DIRECTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO RELEASE THE VEHICLE OF THE PETITIONER** ## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R2(A):** **TRUE COPY OF THE CONFISCATION ORDER NO.S2/8380/2016 DATED 16/01/2018 PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE AS NO.12 DATED 20/03/2018** **EXHIBIT R2(B):** **TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BEFORE HON'BLE JFCM COURT MALAPPURAM**