IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2009 / 3RD BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 16092 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- VINNY P.K. CHATHANKAVU GRANITE WORKS THACHANKUNDIL HOUSE, KUNNAMAGALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR. M.C.RATNAKARAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE THASILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.K. BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 16092 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 25th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The issue involved in this case is, whether the respondents are justified in demanding the collection charges from the petitioner, when the petitioner satisfied the due amount directly to the requisitioning authority, availing the benefit of 'OTS'. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that, the entire amount due to the KFC in respect of the loan availed from them has been satisfied and the necessary clearance certificate has been obtained as borne by Ext.P5. Despite, this the respondents have not chosen to close the recovery proceedings pursued under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act stating that, 5 % of the amount has to be paid by the petitioner as 'collection charges', as informed vide Ext.P6, which hence is sought to be challenged in the Writ Petition. 3. The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that, the issue has already become final, by virtue of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 100 of 2009 holding that, once the machinery under the Revenue Recovery Act is let in motion (on the basis of the requisition made by the concerned authority), the party will have to satisfy the collection charges to an extent of 1 %, even if the WP (C) No. 16092 of 2009 : 2 : matter is settled otherwise. This is also evident from the G. O (P) No. 107 of 2002 dated 24.4.2008 issued by the Government in this regard. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is ready and willing to satisfy the said extent of liability. 5. In the above circumstances, the matter is disposed of directing the petitioner to satisfy the said extent of liability within one month, upon which, all further steps under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act will stand dropped and the properties will stand free from attachment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd