LAWS(KER)-2019-3-153

MATHEW DANIEL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On March 01, 2019
MATHEW DANIEL Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside Ext.P1 order and Ext.P2 judgment.

(2.) The petitioner contends that he is the owner of a Tipper Lorry bearing registration No.26-B/5747. The lorry was seized by the authorities on an allegation that it was used for filing quarry waste to reclaim the paddy land having an extent of 16.40 Ares comprised in Resurvey No.116/72 of Kayamkulam Village, which is owned by one Sreedevi . The allegation is that, the petitioner has violated the provisions of Section 21 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short 'the Act').

(3.) The petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C)No.17221/2012 and this Court directed the second respondent to consider the application of the petitioner to release the vehicle. However, the second respondent passed a confiscation order under Section 20 of the Act on 15.09.2012 as per Ext.P1. The petitioner contended that, his vehicle was seized by the third respondent from PWD Road, which was fully loaded with quarry waste. According to the petitioner, the vehicle was used for transporting quarry waste with legal pass issued by the authorities to fill the land, which is a low lying area. An extent of 16.40 Ares comprised in Resurvey No.116/72 of Kayamkulam Village owned by Sreedevi is not a paddy land. The petitioner produced Exts.P2 to P4 documents. In Ext.P3 order of the District Collector, Alappuzha addressed to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengannur, it has been stated that, the property in question is not included in the data bank and therefore no proceedings can be taken against the owner of the land. Pursuant to Ext.P3, the Revenue Divisional Officer informed the Village Officer, Kayamkulam that no further proceedings need to be taken against the owner of the land. By Ext.P5, the Village Officer informed the Sub Registrar that no further proceedings can be taken in the matter, since the land in question is not included in the data bank.