Judgment :- This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 25th July, 2009 passed by the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Uttara Kannada District, Karwar wherein the first petitioner-Company has been informed that it has obtained transport permit by making misrepresentation and thus the matter requires investigation and until the investigation is completed by the Department of Mines and Geology, it should stop further loading of sand and detain the Ship at Karwar Port. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that the first petitioner was given permit by the first respondent to excavate and remove 1,166 tonnes of sand from Survey No.48 of Kerawadi village, Karwar Taluk and he has paid royalty of Rs.35,000/-. It is the further case of the petitioner that he addressed a letter to the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology on 16th July, 2009 seeking permission to export sand and it had also made an application for grant of transport permit for transporting the sand from Kerawadi to Karwar Port, since it intended to load the sand in the ship as consignment and necessary permits were issued to transport the sand from Kerawadi to Karwar Port and it has already loaded the sand in the ship through the Forwarding Agent-second petitioner herein. 3. The first petitioner, by the impugned communication dated 25th July 2009 has been informed by the first Respondent-Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology that the application given for transporting 150 MT of ordinary sand from Kinnar to Karwar Port, for which temporary permission was issued on 9th July, 2009 to the revenue land but not the Port and the applicant has violated Rule 43 of the Karnataka Minor Mineral rules, 1994 by unauthorisedly transporting 150 MT of sand. Further, the applicant has submitted the application to transport 700 MT of ordinary sand from Kinnar to Karwar port. On 21st July, 2009, Sri Shravan Shirodkar-third petitioner had applied for transportation of 500 MT of ordinary sand from Kerawadi to Baithkol stating that the same is meant for construction purpose, whereas the sand is being transported to Karwar Port, which amounts to unauthorized transportation. Public grievance was received on 24th July, 2009 that ordinary sand is being loaded to the ship for export to Maldives through the first petitioner-Company. Public grievance was received on 24th July, 2009 that ordinary sand is being loaded to the ship for export to Maldives through the first petitioner-Company. 150 MT of ordinary sand, was permitted to be transported from riverbed Karwar Port; 150 MT of ordinary was permitted to be transported sand from Kerawadi to Karwar; 700 MT of ordinary was permitted to be transported from Kerawadi to Baithkol; and 1500 MT of ordinary sand was permitted to be transported for local use. The temporary permit holder has misled the authorities and tried to export the same. It was never disclosed that sand is being transported to Port for exporting the same. The first petitioner-Company has vilated Rule 43 of KMMC Rules and investigation is required to be held in the matter and till the investigation is completed by the Department of Mines and Geology, it is directed to stop further loading of sand in the ship; and also informed the petitioner to co-operate with the investigation of the records and permits by the authorities concerned and till the investigation is complete, the loaded ship shall be detained in the Karwar Port itself, vide communication dated 25th July, 2009. 4. Aggrieved by the impugned communication dated 25th July, 2009 the above writ petition is filed contending that sand has been transported to Karwar Port for the purpose of export after obtaining transport permit and there is no illegality committed by the petitioners. As the sand is already loaded to the ship for being exported to Maldives and at this stage if the petitioner is prevented from further loading and the ship is detained, it has to incur exorbitant charges of demurrage of Rs.4.00 lakhs per day and the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology has no jurisdiction to detain the ship and therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 5. We have heard Sri Udaya Holla, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Harnahalli, learned Advocate General appearing for respondents. 6. 5. We have heard Sri Udaya Holla, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Harnahalli, learned Advocate General appearing for respondents. 6. Sri Udaya Holla, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that first petitioner-Company has transported sand, after obtaining transport permit and has already loaded the sand in the vessel and if it is now prevented from further loading sand in the vessel and if the vessel is detained, the same would cause him irreparable loss and hardship as it has to pay demurrage charges of Rs.4.00 lakh per day. The learned senior counsel further submitted that the petitioner is ready to furnish bank guarantee in respect of the value of the sand, so that, the interest of respondents will be safeguarded. In support of his contention, the learned senior counsel relied upon the decision of Division Bench of Madras High Court in the case of The District Collector, Nagapattinam District v. M/s. Krishna & Company (W.A.No.955/2009 disposed of on 13.7.2009) 7. Sri Ashok Harnahalli, learned Advocate General submitted that transport permits have been obtained by misrepresentation and fraud without informing the authority and the sand is being exported to Maldives. Only two transport permits are produced. One pertaining to transportation of 10 MT of ordinary sand from Kerwadi to Baithkol (for construction purpose) and another transport permit for transportation from Kinner to Karwar port; and transport permit in respect of remaining extent of sand transported and loaded in the vessel for exporting to Maldives, the purposes is not mentioned, and therefore, there is violation of Rule 43 of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession rules, 1994. As an interim measure directions have been issued to the petitioners not to load further sand and to detain the vessel at Karwar Port till the investigation is over and no final order has been passed and investigation would be expedited. 8. We have given our careful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and scrutinized the material on record. 9. The material on record would clearly show that the transport permit has not been obtained for transporting the sand to the Port for the purpose of exporting the same to Maldives. 8. We have given our careful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and scrutinized the material on record. 9. The material on record would clearly show that the transport permit has not been obtained for transporting the sand to the Port for the purpose of exporting the same to Maldives. In one transport permit for transporting 10 MT of sand, the permit is given for transporting the same from Kerwadi to Baithkol (for construction purpose) and in another permit that is produced, permit has been given for transporting the sand from Kinnar to Karwar Port without mentioning the purpose for which it is transported. However, the sand has been already loaded in the vessel as consignment for exporting to Maldives, and therefore material on record would clearly show that transport permit has not been obtained for exporting sand to Maldives and prima facie there is violation of rule 43 of KMMC Rules. Wherefore, having regard to the above facts, the Deputy Director of Department of Mines and Geology has thought it fit that investigation should be conducted into the matter and as an interim measure, till the investigation is completed, the petitioners have been informed that they should not further load the sand into the vessel and the same should be detained and they should co-operative with the authorities till the investigation is completed. 10. The letter dated 16th July, 2009 addressed to the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology regarding grant permit for transport of sand, would clearly show that the application was given by the third petitioner to the Director and the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Uttar Kannada to grant permission/issue of permit for export of ordinary sand, which is mined from kali river for construction purpose only. Further, the petitioners do not dispute that sand cannot be transported without obtaining transport permit and the transport permits produced by the petitioner, as referred to above, clearly show that the permits were not given for transporting sand for exporting it to Maldives and wherefore prima facie, there is illegal transportation of sand and the impugned order, which is passed as an interim measure by the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology, till investigation is completed, cannot be said to be without jurisdiction and does not suffer from any error or illegality at this stage. 11. 11. The Division Bench Judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of The District Collector, Nagapattinam District (supra) relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel is not helpful to the petitioners in the present case having regard to the abovesaid facts as Rule 43 of KMMC Rules provides for imposition of penalty and also for confiscation of sand, if there is any violation of the rule and having regard to the abovesaid facts, We do not find any merit in the contention of the learned Senior Counsel that the petitioners may be permitted to transport the sand which is already loaded into the vessel by furnishing Bank Guarantee for the value of the sand. 12. The learned Advocate General submitted that in view of the fact that the impugned order passed by the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology is an interim measure and would be operative only during the period of investigation, investigation itself would be expedited. 13. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Changalvaraya Naidu (Dead) by LRs. Jagannath (Dead) by LRs and Others reported in (1994) 1 SCC 1 has observed as follows: “5….. The courts of law are meant for imparting justice between the parties. One who comes to the court, must come with clean hands. We are constrained to say that more often than not, process of the court is being abused. Property-grabbers, tax-evaders, bank-loan-dodgers and other unscrupulous persons from all walks of life find the court-process a convenient lever to retain the illegal-gains indefinitely. We have no hesitation to say that a person, who’s case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of the litigation.” 14. Accordingly, we hold that the impugned order does not suffer from any error or illegality so as to call for interference by exercising writ jurisdiction of this Court. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the predicament of the petitioners that even if the sand which is loaded in the vessel is unloaded, it would be treated as import commodity, as the Vessel bears the flag of another Country. Meeting the said submission, the learned Advocate General submitted that mere loading, without any transportation, would not attract any import duty. 15. Meeting the said submission, the learned Advocate General submitted that mere loading, without any transportation, would not attract any import duty. 15. The petitioner has been restrained by the order of the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology, in which event it is open to the petitioner to unload the sand, in which case it will not attract import duty, as unloading of sand from the vessel would be pursuant to an order and to avoid further loss that may be caused to the petitioner. In case the entire quantity of sand loaded by the petitioners is unloaded from the vessel, the vessel may be permitted to leave the Port as the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology has no jurisdiction to detain the same when the sand, which is loaded and the subject matter of enquiry, is unloaded, and investigation will continue. Except making these observations, we hold that the writ petitioners are not entitled to any other relief. 16. Accordingly, writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the first respondent-Deputy Directory of Mines and Geology, Uttara Kannada District, Karwar, to complete the investigation within ten days from today, independently, without being influenced by the observations made in this order, on merits of the case.