C.M.Ameer Ali v. The State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/20TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 12296 of 2015 (J) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------- 1.
C.M.AMEER ALI, AWD No.23, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2.
THE KERALA INDUSTRIAL CO.LTD., AWD No.14 N.PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER, NEELAKANTA DAS 3.
KUTTIALI MAMMU HAJI & CO., AWD No.17 N.PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER K.A. MOHAMMED 4.
A.B. JAMESON, AWD No.19, N. PARAVUR ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 5.
SHEEBA JAMESON, AWD No.3, ELAMKULAM ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
6.
PRAVEEN K.P., AWD No.XI, FORT KOCHI VELI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 7.
SAJI K.S., AWD No.5 PALLURUTHY NADA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 8.
A.B. PRADEEP, AWD No.1, EDAVANAKKAD PO ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
9.
AKHIL JEEVAN, AWD No.11, CHERAI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
10.
K.R. ANILRAJ, AWD No.12, KANDAKADAVU ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------- 1.
THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
2.
THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 3.
THE COMMISSIONER, FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, OPPOSITE MUSEUM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 4.
THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, - 682 030 5.
THE FOOD COPORATION OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM PALACE PO THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICER AND REGIONAL GENERAL MANAGER 6.
THE DISTRICT MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ERNAKULAM - 682 030 R5&6 BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ANISON R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT. SOBHA ANNAMMA EAPPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 12296 of 2015 (J) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 19.03.2014.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 22.08.2014 IN WP(C) 23537/2012 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER, DATED 24.04.2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION WITH LIST OF AWDS FOR REIMBURSEMENT, PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS AND SERVED ON 4TH RESPONDENT ON 30.03.2015.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- -------------------------------------------- NIL // True copy // PA to Judge das
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 12296 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 10th day of April, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are authorised wholesale dealers of rationed articles in Ernakulam district. There were amounts paid by them towards tax in respect of the turnover of rationed articles. It is the case of the petitioners that they were exempted from payment of tax, and hence, there was no legal basis for the collection of tax from them by the respondents. Pursuant to orders of the Government, it was clarified that the petitioners were not liable to pay tax during the period in question. Accordingly, the petitioners have approached the 4th respondent with Ext.P4 representation giving details of the tax paid by them and seeking a refund of the same. In the writ petition, the grievance of the petitioners is that although Ext.P4 representation was preferred before the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent has not passed any orders on the same.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ
-2W.P.(C). No. 12296 of 2015 petition with a direction to the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation, if any, preferred by the petitioners, seeking refund of the tax paid by them during the relevant period, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das