IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2010 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 11544 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- GASPER N.AUGUSTINE,AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.AUGUSTINE,NEDIAPARAMBIL HOUSE,CHULLIKKAL, KOCHI-5. BY ADV. SRI.N.C.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI. 2. THE TAHSILDAR,KOCHI TALUK,KOCHI. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,KAKKANAD. 4. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 11544 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the revenue recovery proceedings being pursued at the instance of the respondents for realisation of the amount stated as due under the Kerala Building Tax Act both under Section 5 and 5A, pertaining to 'Building Tax' and 'Luxury Tax' respectively. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the the petitionner submits that the impugned assessment orders passed by the Assessing Authority have already been subjected to challenge by filing Exts.P4 and P5 appeals which have not been finalised so far, despite which, coercive steps are being pursued. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits on instruction, that Exts.P4 and P5 appeals have been considered already and since the petitioner did not appear before the Appellate Authority, on the date of hearing, the appeals were dismissed for default. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no notice whatsoever has been served to the petitioner with regard to the hearing of the appeals and WPC NO. 11544/2010 -2- hence the petitioner intends to challenge the sustainability of the orders stated as passed on Exts.P4 and P5, copies of which are yet to be served to the petitioner. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the first respondent is directed to serve copies of the orders stated as passed on Ext.P4 and P5 to the petitioner forthwith, at any rate within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner is permitted to challenge the impugned orders by resorting to the alternative remedy as provided under the statute by filing the revision petition before the third respondent under Section 13 of the very same enactment. So as to enable the petitioner to pursue such exercise, all further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P7 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. dpk WPC NO. 11544/2010 -3- dpk