IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 11976 of 2006(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.P.MOHAMMED KUNHI, C.J. MAHIN HOUSE, MAHIN NAGAR, CHETTANKUZHI P.O., VIDYANAGAR, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CIVIL STATION, KASARGOD. 2. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHASILDAR (RR), HOSDURG. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MANOJ P KUNJACHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 11976 of 2006(A) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, KASARAGOD TO THE PETITIONER DT. 27.8.1993 EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SALES OFFICER UNDER KGST RULES EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, KASARAGOD VIDE HIS ORDER NO A3/3017/94/D.DIS DT. 27.10.1994 EXT.P4 : TRUE COY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH COPY TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.30.3.2006 RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE jma K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C)No. 11976 OF 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner in the above writ petition challenges Ext.P5 revenue recovery steps initiated against him on the ground that a revision is pending before the first respondent, however, but for a blank statement that the petitioner has filed revision before the first respondent, no copy of the memorandum said to have been filed is produced in the writ petition. The petitioners' counsel also was absent when the matter was called and I did not receive any assistance for the disposal of the case more particularly regarding the assessment years for which the revision was filed or the issues raised therein. In the circumstances I find no ground and the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //TRUE COPY// P.A to Judge