IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2010 / 9TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29657 of 2010(F) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- SWASTIC SALES AGENCY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, RAMBILAS AGARWAL, 86, GIRINAGAR, CANAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.J.XAVIER RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IIND CIRCLE, PALAKKAD-678 001. 2. THE APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, PALAKKAD-678 001. 3. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, PALAKKAD-678 001. 4. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, PALAKKAD-678 001. * ADDL. R5 IMPLEADED 5. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD). ** IS SUO-MOTU IMPLEADED ADDL. 5TH RESPONDENT VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 01/10/2010 IN WPC. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 29657 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Grievance of the petitioner is that an amount of Rs.27,302/- remitted as security deposit for release of a transport detained by the Intelligence Inspector, Squad No. II, Palakkad has not been refunded inspite of Ext.P2 order issued as early as on 22.09.2008. The Intelligence Officer, Squad No. No. II, Palakkad conducted an enquiry as contemplated under Section 29 A and issued an order imposing penalty. Against that order the petitioner had approached the appellate authority, the second respondent herein. In Ext.P2 appellate order the penalty was set aside. Thereafter the petitioner submitted various requests before the first respondent and the Intelligence Officer, Squad No. I, Palakkad, for effecting refund of amount of security deposit. But no order of refund has been issued so far. 2. Learned Government Pleader on the basis of 2 WP(C) No. 29657/2010 instructions submitted that the deposit was made before the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Intelligence, Commercial Taxes, Palakkad) and the petitioner has not approached that authority. It is pertinent to note that the respondents herein has neither issued any reply to the petitioner nor had forwarded the application to the authority concerned for effecting refund, in spite of being convinced that the penalty order stands set aside and that the petitioner is entitled for refund. 3. Under the above circumstances, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Intelligence, Commercial Taxes, Palakkad) is impleaed suo-motu as additional 5th respondent in this case. The first respondent is directed to transmit the request received from the petitioner claiming refund, forthwith to the said officer. The petitioner is also at liberty to approach the said officer claiming refund. 4. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Intelligence) (additional 5th respondent) is hereby directed 3 WP(C) No. 29657/2010 to consider the claim and to issue necessary orders of refund within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc