IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 WA.No. 448 of 2008 --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.3474/2008 Dated 13/02/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- K.R.GOPI, PROPRIETOR SABITHA SUPARI TRADERS, HILL PRODUCE DEALER CHALISSERY, PALAKKAD-679 536. BY ADV. SRI.R.MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI & SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.II THALASSERY-670 701. 2. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KANNUR. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE. 4. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI VINOD CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON 28/02/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L. DATTU, CJ. & K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.A. NO.448 OF 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th February, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L. DATTU, C.J: This Writ Appeal is directed against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.3474/08 dated 13.2.2008. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has refused to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner. 2. Appellant/petitioner is a registered dealer both under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (for short `the Act') and the CST Act. He claims that he is a dealer in betel nuts, both intra and inter-State. Vehicles bearing registration Nos.TN 46-D-3926 and C.G. 04/JA/4290 were intercepted by the Intelligence Officer of the Department. After such interception and after verification of the documents, the respondents have issued Exts.P3 and P4 Notices under Section 47(2) of the Act to the owner of the goods and Exts.P5 and P6 notices under Section 69 of the Act to the owner of the vehicles. By these Exhibits, the respondents had directed the owner of the goods as well as the owner of the vehicles to pay particular amounts for release of the vehicles and the goods contained in the vehicles. It is the claim of the petitioner that though he was prepared to pay the aforesaid amounts reflected in Exts.P3, P4, P5 and P6 Notices, since the respondents did not release the vehicles in question along with the goods, he has approached this Court in W.P.(C). No.3474 of 2008 for directing respondents 1 & 2 to release the goods and the two trucks bearing registration Nos.TN 46 3 - 3926 and C.G. 04/JA/4290 on collecting the demanded amounts under Exts.P3, P4, P5 and P6 Notices, dispensing with the payments under Ext.P7 Notice. WA 448/08 2 3. After hearing the learned Government Advocate for the Revenue, the learned Single Judge has rejected the Writ Petition and thereby the relief sought for by the petitioner was refused by the learned Single Judge. That is how the petitioner is before us in this Writ Appeal. 4. During the pendency of the Writ Appeal, the respondents have filed a Statement before this Court dated 26.2.2008. In that, they have stated that the Notice issued under Section 47(2) of the Act to the owner of the Goods and the Notice issued under Section 69 of the Act to the owner of the vehicles which are the subject matter of the Appeal, are not being proceeded with. 5. It is also brought to our notice by Shri Vinod Chandran, learned Special Government Pleader at the time of hearing of this Writ Appeal that the respondents have revised Ext.P7 Notice and thereafter, they have passed an order under Section 67 of the Act. 6. In the Writ Petition, the relief that was sought for by the petitioner who is a registered dealer is to release the goods and also the trucks by collecting the amounts demanded in Exts.P3, P4, P5 and P6 after dispensing with the payments under Ext.P7 Notice. 7. Since the respondents have filed a Statement before this Court stating that they are not proceeding to recover any amounts from the petitioner under Exts.P3, P4, P5 and P6 Notices, it may not be possible for this Court to direct the respondents to release the goods and the vehicles to the appellant/petitioner. In that view of the matter, the Writ Appeal requires to be rejected by us as having become unnecessary. However, liberty is reserved to the appellant/petitioner, if so advised, to question the correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the respondents WA 448/08 3 under Section 69 of the Act and also the proceedings under Section 47 (2) of the Act before the appropriate Forum. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH, kbk. JUDGE