Kerala High Court
Sirajuddin vs The District Collector on 14 September, 2015
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2017/16TH PHALGUNA, 1938
WP(C).No. 7561 of 2017 (U)
-----------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
-------------------------
SIRAJUDDIN,
AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KHADER,
KALATHAKATHU(KURUPPINTAKATHOOTT),
WEST VELIYATHUNADU P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 683 511.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.BABU KUMAR
SRI.VISHNU BABU
SRI.C.JAYAKIRAN
RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
PALAKKAD- 678 001.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 7561 of 2017 (U)
----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT
DATED 14.9.2015.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE MAHAZER DATED 10.6.2015.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BEFORE
THE RESPONDENT DATED 04.03.2017.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED BY
THE RESPONDENT DATED 04.03.2017.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
W.P(C).NO. 6622/17 DATED 28.02.2017.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TOJUDGE.
Msd.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
-------------------------------
W.P.(C).NO.7561 OF 2017 (U)
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of March, 2017
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the seizure of bricks, which were manufactured by him. It is the case of the petitioner that the bricks were seized by the Village Officer, and the mahazar prepared indicates that it was seized in connection with an alleged offence under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and WetLand Act, 2008 [hereinafter referred to as the '2008 Act']. While the petitioner disputes the allegations against him, it is his case that pursuant to the seizure, he has preferred Ext.P3 application before the respondent seeking a release of the bricks.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:
W.P.(C).No.7561/2017 2
(i) The Village Officer concerned shall forthwith, and at any rate within three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, forward a report regarding the seizure to the respondent.
(ii) On receipt of the report from the Village Officer concerned, and within two weeks thereafter, the respondent shall take a decision with regard to whether or not a seizure of the goods is warranted in accordance with Section 20 of the 2008 Act. If no seizure is warranted under the said Act, the respondent shall immediately forward the report to the Geologist concerned, who shall adjudicate the matter to ascertain whether an offence attracting the provisions of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act is made out. If the offence is one that can be compounded, he shall permit the petitioner to compound the offence on payment of a compound fee, which shall not be less than the value of the goods liable for confiscation. The Geologist shall take note of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Sirajuddin v. District Collector - [2017 (1) KLT 756] and pass orders in the matter, after hearing the petitioner, within two weeks from the date of receipt of the report from the District Collector.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/7/3/17