IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10152 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MOIDEEN HAJI,S/O.MOIDU,THIRUNILATHU HOUSE,PALLAR DESOM,THIRUNAVAYA,THIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.P.BALAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. TAHSILDAR,KOZHIKODE. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER,KASBA VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE. 3. CORPORATION OF KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1&2 BY G.P. SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.10152 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 whereunder petitioner is called upon to pay building tax in respect of a commercial building constructed by the petitioner. Counsel contended that no proposal was issued before assessment and petitioner has not even completed the building or commenced business therein. In order to attract liability, completion of construction is the only criteria and not occupancy of the building, which according to the petitioner is denied on account of want of pollution clearance. So far as the dispute on plinth area is concerned, it is seen that the plinth area assessed is less than the plinth area as shown in the approved plan issued by the local authority. Since assessment is said to be completed by the Tahsildar after personal inspection and verification of plinth area, I do not find any ground to interfere with the same. However, if petitioner desires, petitioner can remit 50% and file appeal against the impugned order before the R.D.O. W.P. is disposed of as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms