IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2011 / 15TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 323 of 2011(M) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.AMAR TIMBER TRADERS, PERUMBAVOOR,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER P.A.ANISH, S/O.ABDUL MAJEED, PUTHENPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR KARA, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE VILLAGE OFFIER, PERUMBAVOOR,PERUMBAVOOR P.O., 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, TALUK OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR. 3. THE TALUK TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 5. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 1ST CIRCLE, SALES TAX OFFICE, PERUMBAVOOR. 6. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS) OF SALE TAX, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R6 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 323 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P1(a) orders of assessment finalised with respect to the years 2003-04 and 2004-05 under the provisions of the CST Act, the petitioner had preferred statutory appeals before the 6th respondent as evidenced from Exts.P2 and P2(a). Ext.P2(a) appeal was filed along with the application seeking condonation of delay, as per Ext.P5. Exts.P3 and P3(a) are the stay petitions filed along with the appeals. According to the petitioner, appeals and accompanying applications are pending consideration and disposal before the 6th respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that, without considering pendency of the matter before the 6th respondent, coercive steps of recovery has now been initiated on the basis of Exts.P4 and P4(a) demand notices issued under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Hence the petitioner seeks direction to restrain recovery steps till the disposal of the appeals. WP(C).323/2011 2 2. Considering the fact that the appellate authority is in seizin of the matter, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of on issuing necessary directions to that authority to expedite the matter. 3. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 6th respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 delay condonation application as well as Exts.P3 and P3(a) stay petitions after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. Till such time orders are passed by the 6th respondent, the recovery of amounts covered under Exts.P1 and P1(a), which is now initiated on the basis of Exst.P4 and P4(a) notices, shall be kept in abeyance. 5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 6th respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).323/2011 3