M.BOOPATHI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case set up in this Writ petition (C) is as follows:

(2.) Heard Sri.Babu.S.Nair, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Sri.K.J.Manu Raj, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that his vehicle, which was hired by a property holder for use of the said vehicle (Excavator), has been seized by the 4th respondent Station House Officer on the basis of the instructions of the 2nd respondent Tahsildar for alleged contravention of the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 etc,. According to the petitioner the said seizure is illegal and ultra vires and not even the seizure mahazar has been duly filed in this case etc,. Thereafter the 3 rd respondent Village Officer has conducted enquiry and has submitted report No.52/20 dated 13-06-2020 (referred to in Ext.P3) to the 2 nd respondent Tahsildar and based on the said report the 2 nd respondent Tahsildar has issued Ext.P3 letter dated 18-06-2020 to the 3rd respondent Village Officer that from the abovesaid report it is seen that the construction activity has been undertaken in the subject property, after the property holder has secured building permit and further that the subject property has not been included in the land data bank prepared as per the provisions of the 2008 Act, etc., and certain other details are also elicited in Ext.P3.