SIJO JOSE Vs. VILLAGE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The jurisdiction, power and competence of the second respondent who passed Ext. P3 order imposing a fine of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) upon the petitioner in respect of the alleged offence committed under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 and Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 is under challenge in this Writ Petition. The petitioner also challenges the consequential order by way of Ext. P4 dated 8.4.2013 passed by the very same respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the seizure of the vehicle bearing Registration No. KL-13-N-9969 belonging to the petitioner by the Village Officer is under challenge in W.P. (C) No. 27667 of 2012 on many aground; which has already been admitted and an interim order has been granted, whereby the interim custody of the vehicle has been released pursuant to Ext. P2 interim order. It is during the pendency of the said proceeding, that the 2nd respondent chose to pass Ext. P3 order, whereby a 'fine' has been imposed upon the petitioner; for which absolutely no power is vested with the said respondent under any circumstance.

(2.) Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. After hearing both the sides, this Court does not require any second thought to hold that there is no power with the second respondent to impose any fine in respect of any offence, if at all, under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 and Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. The power to impose 'fine' actually vests with the competent Court of law. It is also brought out that, there is a mention with regard to the alleged violation of the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Act and even if there is such offence, if at all any, still there is no power vested with the 2nd respondent to impose any 'fine' as in the instant case.