IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2008 / 16TH ASHADHA 1930 WA.No. 1400 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN RP.507/2008 Dated 17/06/2008 .................... APPELLANT: REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER ---------------------------- MUTHOOT TECHNOPOLIS, COCHIN SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE (CSEZ) CSEZ POST, KAKKANAD-682030 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, THOMAS GEORGE MUTHOOT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. THE TAHASILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695OO1. 4. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 5. THE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, CSEZ, KAKKANAD, COCHIN-682030. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ===================== W.A.No.1400 of 2008 ===================== Dated this the 7th day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy,J. The petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition for quashing Exts.P3 and P6 and direct the respondents to refer the case to the fourth respondent for exempting the petitioner from the payment of building tax as per the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act. We are of the opinion that Exts.P3 and P6 are appealable. It is trite law that when statutory appeal is provided, it is for the appellate authority to consider the matter on merits. The appellate authority can also consider the factual aspects and the matter can be decided only after going through these aspects. The appellate authority can decide the matter. Therefore, the learned single Judge ought not have entertained the matter and decided the matter on merits and the Writ Petition ought to have been dismissed in view of alternative remedy. WA 1400/08 -: 2 :- 2. In these circumstances, we set aside the judgment including recovery and allow the petitioner to file an appeal against the assessment and impugned orders. If an appeal is filed within one month from today, the same shall be considered in accordance with law without looking into the aspects of the time bar. The Writ Appeal is allowed. J.B.Koshy, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 10/7