Muhammed Shafi v. The District Collector And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/18TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 1150 of 2010 (P) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------- MUHAMMED SHAFI, S/O.CHEKKU, OOROTHIYIL HOUSE, OZHUR P.O., TIRUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, TIRUR VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV.P.V. ELIAS, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.1150/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1 :
COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 1.12.2009 P2 :
COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 27.03.2009 IN WPC NO.9583/2009 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT P3 :
COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 03.04.2009 IN WPC NO.11206/2009 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE JV
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.
------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.1150 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of June, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the petitioner's vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-55B/4045 and seeking a declaration that the seizure of the said vehicle by the 2nd respondent is illegal as he is not an authorized officer under Sections 12 and 19 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008.
2. By order dated 13.01.2010, this Court granted an interim order directing the respondent to release the vehicle in question, on the petitioner executing a bond in favour of the 1st respondent and on a further condition that he should produce the vehicle as and when called for and that he will not alienate the same except with the permission of this Court.
3. Today, when the case was taken up for final hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on the basis of interim order dated 13.01.2010, the petitioner obtained
W.P.(C) No.1150/2010 custody of the vehicle and hence, no further orders are required in this writ petition.
In such circumstances, recording the aforesaid submission made by the petitioner, this writ petition is closed. It is made clear that if the confiscation proceedings initiated against the petitioner is yet to be completed, the 1st respondent shall do necessary steps in that regard within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
SD/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JV JUDGE