Abdul Arif v. Intelligence Inspector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/6TH ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 29017 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- ABDUL ARIF, SON OF MUSTHAFA, BAITHUL KALFAN, ISSATH NAGAR, VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM), SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR, SRI.K.UMAMAHESWAR.

RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.III, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KASARAGOD-671 121.

2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.III, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KASARAGOD-671 121.

3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, NIRMAL ARCADE, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE-673 006.

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.LIJU V.STEPHEN.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

WP(C).No. 29017 of 2015 (B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1 COPY OF THE INDIAN PASSPORT NO.K8499796.

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07/07/2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT.P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12/08/2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P4 COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 22/08/2015.

EXT.P5 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/08/2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P6 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P5 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXT.P7 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P6 APPEAL. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

............................................................. W.P.(C).No.29017 of 2015 ............................................................. Dated this the 28th day of September, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the detention of a consignment of goods that was being transported at the instance of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P5 order imposing penalty on the petitioner. Against Ext.P5 order of penalty, the petitioner had preferred Ext.P6 revision petition as also Ext.P7 stay petition before the 3rd respondent. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that, on account of the delay in the disposal of Ext.P7 stay petition, the goods that were detained have not been released to the petitioner and any further delay will result in a deterioration of the goods.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar and taking note of the urgency projected on behalf of the petitioner, I direct the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 stay petition preferred by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Taking note of the contentions of the petitioner with

W.P.(C).No.29017 of 2015 regard to release of the goods, I make it clear that, while considering Ext.P7 stay petition, the 3rd respondent shall also consider the prayer of the petitioner for release of the goods that are detained by the 1st respondent, pending disposal of the revision petition.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns