IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2010 / 13TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14146 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.KALLARAKKAL MAHARANI GOLD SUPER MARKET,M.G.ROAD, KASARAGOD-REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI.K.O.ANTO. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(KVAT), SPECIAL CIRCLE,DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KASARAGOD. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, NIRMAL ARCADE,ERNAJIPALAM,CALICUT. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KASARAGOD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 14146 of 2010-P ---------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T Challenging Exts.P1 and P2 orders passed by the first respondent, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P6 and P7 appeals along with Exts.P6(a) and P7(a) petitions for stay. Because of the coercive proceedings pursued in the meanwhile, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P(C) No.6346 of 2010 and as per Ext.P8 judgment dated 1.3.2010, this Court directed the appellate authority to consider the interlocutory applications for stay and to pass appropriate orders thereon, simultaneously, intercepting the coercive proceedings till such time. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the direction given by this Court as per Ext.P8, interlocutory applications for stay were considered and quite arbitrarily, they have been rejected by the appellate authority, as per Ext.P9 order, which made the petitioner to approach this Court again, in view of the coercive steps being pursued in the meanwhile. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. W.P(C) No. 14146 of 2010-P 2 4. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 4.5.2010, recovery proceedings were ordered to be kept in abeyance, on condition that the petitioner remitted 50% of the tax due within three weeks. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition has been satisfied. 6. In the above circumstances, the second respondent is directed to consider and pass final orders on Exts.P6 and P7 appeals in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. It is made clear that, the petitioner will continue to have the benefit of interim order already granted by this Court, till such time. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab