IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2008 / 8TH SRAVANA 1930 W.P.(C).No. 22333 of 2008(H) PETITIONER: P.R.UDAYAKUMAR, S/O.P.K.RAGHAVAN, SOMINI MANDIRAM, PADINJATTINKARA, KOTTARAKKARA,KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES (G) DEPARTMENT, SECRETRIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, EXCISE COMPLEX, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, (RR), TALUK OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. 6. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,KOTTARAKKARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. *ADDL.R7. R.D.O, KOLLAM *ADDL. 7TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.NO. 9942/08 DATED 30.07.2008 BY GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 22333 OF 2008 H = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 30th day of July 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was an abkari contractor during the year 1996-97. Default was committed and recovery proceedings were initiated. According to the petitioner, he had approached the Government and obtained stay on condition that he remits 5% of the dues. Petitioner submits that in compliance with the Government Order he remitted Rs.40,485/- with the 6th respondent, who has acknowledged the same by Ext. P1. It is submitted that, however, the remittance so made was wrongly given credit towards the Abkari Workers Welfare Fund Scheme and revenue recovery action continued against the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned Govt. Pleader that out of the amount remitted by Ext. P1 Rs.38,557/- has been subsequently given credit in the petitioners abkari account. 2. It is his complaint that his properties were ultimately sold for an amount of Rs.10,58,150/-. Petitioner submits that the sale was conducted on 23.3.2008. It is stated that the proceedings pursuant to the sale is pending confirmation before the Revenue W.P.(C) No.22333 OF 2008 -2- Divisional Officer, the additional 7th respondent. 3. In the meanwhile the Government have announced an Amnesty Scheme by Ext. P3. Petitioner submits that as per clause 3 of Ext. P3 on payment of 100% of the principal amount and 5% of the interest and penalty, he is entitled to get himself exonerated of his liabilities. While so, the Excise Circle Inspector, Kottarakkara by making his endorsement intimated to the petitioner that on payment of Rs.4,06670/- with 5% interest and penalty, he can liquidate his liability. In order to avail of the benefit of Ext. P3, petitioner submits that he has filed Ext. P5 application before the 3rd respondent and that the matter is pending. Simultaneously, petitioner submitted Ext. P4 representation before the additional 7th respondent requesting that the amount intimated to him by Ext. P3 be appropriated out of the sale proceeds and the balance amount be released to him. Since a decision on Exts. P4 and P5 has not been taken by the aforesaid respondents, this writ petition has been filed for appropriate orders. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner is a defaulter and by Ext. P3 he has been intimated that on payment of the amount mentioned therein, he can get himself exonerated of the liability. It is to avail of the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme that the petitioner has made W.P.(C) No.22333 OF 2008 -3- Ext. P5 application before the 3rd respondent. Now it is for the 3rd respondent to take a decision on Ext. P5 and this he shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Once a decision is taken as above, then it is for the RDO before whom confirmation of sale is pending, to decide on Ext. P4, where the petitioner requests that out of the sale proceeds already realised by him, the amount due towards the Amnesty Scheme be paid to the 3rd respondent and the balance be released to him. 5. Therefore, I direct that once the 3rd respondent decides on Ext. P5 application made by the petitioner for the benefit of Ext. P3 Amnesty Scheme, the petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the additional 7th respondent who shall decide on the claim of the petitioner with notice to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent and necessary adjustments will also be made immediately thereafter. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-