IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2009 / 1ST POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 34662 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.M.NAZAR @ RAJU, KARUMBELIL, NEW BUNGLOW, VADAKKEVILA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.B.HARI NARAYANAN SMT.M.J.RAJASREE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. TAHDILAR (RR), KOLLAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.34662 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Challenge is against Ext.P5 sale notice published with respect to immovable property belonging to the petitioner which contains his residential house, for realisation of sales tax arrears with respect to a cashew factory owned by the petitioner. It is contended that the land in which the factory is situated was sold under revenue recovery proceedings and the Government had purchased the land for Re.1/- invoking provisions under Section 50 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. According to the petitioner the property in question, wherein the factory situates, will fetch an amount of about Rs.2 crores. However, the petitioner had already filed a petition before the District Collector seeking to set aside the sale, under Section 53 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. From Ext.P4 it is evident that the said petition was posted for hearing before the District Collector on 22.5.2008. The petitioner had produced for my perusal a further notice of hearing issued, from which it is evident that the matter was thereafter posted for hearing on 15.12.2009. The petitioner submitted that the matter was fully heard on that day W.P.(C).34662/09-C 2 and orders of the District Collector is awaited. Therefore the petitioner seeks deferment of the sale proposed under Ext.P5 notice, till the District Collector passes orders on the application set aside sale conducted with respect to the property wherein the factory situates. 2. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents contended that the arrears due, which is sought to be recovered, is more than Rs.12 crores, and even assuming that sale with respect to the factory property is set aside, it will not wipe off liability of the petitioner and therefore the sale proclaimed under Ext.P5 has to be proceeded with. It is also stated that yet another property is proclaimed for sale on 14.1.2010. 3. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent District Collector to pass orders on the petition filed seeking to set aside the sale, at the earliest. The sale proclaimed under Ext.P5 need be kept deferred till a decision is taken by the District Collector. 4. In the result the 2nd respondent is directed to pass orders on the petition filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the sale, which was posted for hearing pursuant to Ext.P4 notice, W.P.(C).34662/09-C 3 and which was heard in full on 15.12.2009, as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. The respondents are directed to defer sale of the property proclaimed under Ext.P5 till orders are passed by the District Collector as directed above. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb