IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 18TH MAY 2010 / 28TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 9392 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- A.M.ABDUL HAMEED, M/S.ARAFA TRADERS, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER (TAXES) ADV. MR. K. VINOD CHANDRA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 9392 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 18th May , 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: “a) To quash Ext. P8 to P8(c) orders passed by the 2nd respondent by the issue of a writ of certiorari or such other writ, or order or direction. b) to grant the petitioner such other incidental reliefs including the costs of these proceedings.” 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 09.04.2010, coercive proceedings were intercepted ordering 'status quo', on condition that the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.Fifteen lakhs within two weeks and another sum of Rs. Fifteen lakhs within two weeks thereafter. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the above condition has not been complied with and that the petitioner intends to avail the benefit of the Amnesty scheme as well. W.P.(C) No. 9392 OF 2010 2 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 4. Obviously, the petitioner is having an effective alternate remedy by way of appeal before the statutory authority. However, this Court, taking note of the persuasive submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner ordered 'status quo' pending consideration of the matter in detail, for admission. Admittedly, the condition imposed by this Court while granting the interim order has not been complied with. The petitioner has proved by his deed that the discretion exercised by this Court was quite out of place. In the said circumstance, no further interference is warranted and the Writ Petition is dismissed, declining admission; however without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy by way of appeal. It is made clear that this will not bar the way of the petitioner in availing the benefit of Amnesty Scheme, if any. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk