IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 19TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 26041 of 2005(A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ROY PORATTUKKARAN, PORUTHUKKARAN HOUSE, MADAYIKONAM P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. IRINJALAKUDA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO.594, IRINJALAKUDA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SALES TAX OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA. 3. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM. R2 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.P. PRADEEP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.26041/2005-A: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 16/04/2005 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. 12/05/2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.3. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2.A: COPY OF THE SECTION 17 (3) NOTICE DTD 26/02/2005. EXT.R2.B: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER RECEIVED BY THE R.2. ON 28/02/2005. EXT.R2.C: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE R.1. EXT.R2.D: COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 26041 OF 2005 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 8th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of Ext. P1 assessment order passed afresh by the second respondent in respect of the assessment years 2000 - '01, which in fact is a proceeding of 'protective assessment' under Section 19 C of the KGST Act, wherein the first respondent Bank is also made as party in view of its alleged involvement. It is stated in the Writ Petition that Ext. P1 order has already been subjected to challenge by the petitioner and the bank by filing Ext. P2 appeal before the third respondent. The petitioner apprehended disqualification of candidature of the petitioner in the ensuing Panchayath election which made him to approach this Court, also seeking for a direction to have Ext. P2 appeal disposed of. 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 02.09.2005, the following interim order was passed. “G.P. takes notice. G.P. will find out from the Assessing Officer as to why recovery is not initiated against the Bank if it is liable or against the petitioner if he is liable. On the face of it, I do not think the petitioner is liable for tax based on Ext. P1 order. In the circumstances, pending further W.P. (C) No. 26041 of 2005 : 2 : orders in the W.P.(C) there will be a declaration that Ext. P1 basically issued against the Irinjalakuda Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. though showing the petitioner's name also should not be treated as a liability due from the petitioner for the purpose of considering his eligibility for standing in local body elections. However, this order shall not act as a stay against recovery from the person liable”. 3. Obviously, the Panchayath election as referred to in the Writ Petition was over years back and the subsequent election to the local authorities also is over by the end of October, 2010. In the said circumstances, the prayer of the petitioner with regard to the apprehended disqualification is rather infructuous. With regard to the remaining prayer as to the finalization of Ext. P2 appeal, the appellate authority before whom the appeal is stated as pending is directed to consider the same and pass final orders thereon in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment, if the same is still pending. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd