Thahira Pareeth v. The Commercial Tax Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/3RD CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 7720 of 2015 (L) --------------------------- PETITIONER :
----------------------- THAHIRA PAREED, MANACKAL HOUSE, NADACKAL, ERATTUPETTA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC SMT.MABLE.C.KURIAN RESPONDENTS:
-------------------------
1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 575.
2. THE TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 575.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 575.
4. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., PIN - 695 001, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).No. 7720 of 2015 (L) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1:
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03/03/2014 IN WPC.NO. 5253/2014 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXT.P2:
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/12/2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P3:
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. B2-4381/2009 DATED 20/02/2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.7720 OF 2015 (L) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in proceeding with revenue recovery steps for recovery of amounts from the petitioner, at a time when the revision petition filed by the petitioner before the 4th respondent is stated to have been not disposed by the 4th respondent, despite the directions in Ext.P1 judgment.
When the matter came up for orders today, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, that the 4th respondent has in fact passed an order dated 1.8.2014 in the revision petition filed by the petitioner before him and the said order has been served on the petitioner. In the light of the said submission of the learned Government Pleader, the prayers in the writ petition, which proceed on the basis that the 4th respondent has not passed any order on the revision petition, cannot be granted. Accordingly, leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 1.8.2014 in fresh
W.P.(C).No.7720/2015 proceedings, if so advised, the present writ petition is closed as infructuous.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp