IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2008 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35725 of 2008(C) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- ANANDA SHANMUGH KSHTHRA YOGAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SHRI O.E.KUMARAN. S/O.PAPPAN, AGED 71 YEARS OLANICKAL,KIZHATHADIYOOR,LALAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER CIVIL STATION, PALA. 3. TAHZILDAR, (ASSESSING AUTHORITY) MEENACHIL TALUK, PALA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 35725 OF 2008 C -------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P2 which is an assessment order under the Kerala Building Tax Act. Ext.P3 is a notice of demand. Petitioner preferred Ext.P4 Appeal. The Appeal was rejected vide Ext.P5 for non-payment of the first instalment. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. Case of the petitioner is that the building in question is principally used for religious and charitable purposes and it is entitled to be exempted under Section 3(b) of the Kerala Building Tax Act and it should have been referred to the Government. Learned Government Pleader, in fact, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has indeed raised it before the Assessing Officer himself. If such a claim was raised, the Officer is duty bound to refer the matter and he could not have proceeded to decide the case, as he appears to have done by passing Ext.P2 order of assessment and further WPC.35725/08 C 2 issuing Ext.P3 demand. In such circumstances, Exts.P2 and P3 cannot be sustained. Exts.P2 and P3 are quashed and there will be a direction to the third respondent to refer the issue to the first respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Thereupon, the first respondent will issue notice to the petitioner and will afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and take a decision in accordance with law within two months from the date of receipt of the reference from the third respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge