IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18546 of 2011(P) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. SAJI, PUTHANVEETTIL, ARUNNOOTTIMANGALAM, MAVELIKKARA. 2. AJEESH, AJEESH BHAVAN, THEKKAKARA P.O., MAVELIKKARA. 3. SAINUDHEEN, CHATHANKOT, MULLOORKKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON, SRI.MAHESH V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. 3. DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM-691 001. 4. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, MAVELIKKARA-690 101. 5. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, 680 001. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 18546 of 2011(P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE STATEMENT EXECUTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.1 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.10 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.1 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.10 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.1 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.10 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 18546 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 8th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Against Ext. P1 penalty order, the petitioner filed Ext. P2 appeal along with Ext. P3 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, recovery proceedings have been initiated by Exts. P5 to P10. According to the petitioner, it is unjust to enforce the recovery when the appellate authority did not get a chance to consider the stay application. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I am of opinion that it is unjust to enforce recovery when the appellate authority did not have any occasion to consider the stay petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The 3rd respondent-appellate authority shall consider and pass on Ext. P3 stay petition as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then coercive recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/