IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 W.P.(C).No. 7508 of 2008(R) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- LAILA JACOB, JACOBS METAL INDUSTRIES, MAZHUKEER, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, CHENGANNUR. 2. TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), TALUK OFFICE, CHENGANNUR. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, KALLISSERY, CHENGANNUR. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 7508 OF 2008 - R = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner contends that her deceased husband was running an industrial unit, which is an assessee under the 1st respondent. It is stated that for the assessment years 1991-92 to 2004-05 Exts. P1 to Ext. P10 assessment orders were issued and that said assessment orders were modified in appeals reducing the tax liability. Except the orders for the years 1991-92 and 1992-93, rest of the appellate orders are produced by the petitioner as Exts. P11 to P19. 2. Despite the modification at the hands of the appellate authority as noticed above, petitioner complains that steps have been initiated for recovering the dues in terms of the assessment orders without giving the benefit of the appellate order. In this context, petitioner submitted Ext. P20 representation to the 1st respondent and orders have not been passed on the representation. It is also the petitioner's case that she has already paid an amount of Rs.3,58,770/- towards the tax liability. W.P.(C) No. 7508 OF 2008 - 2 - 3. Since all that the petitioner seeks is that Ext. P20 representation be directed to be considered by the 1st respondent and that the benefit of the appellate orders be given to her, I do not see any good reason to decline that relief. 4. In view of this, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 1st respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext. P20 representation filed by the petitioner. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. I also direct that in the meanwhile the recovery in terms of Exts. P1 to P10 shall be kept in abeyance. At this stage counsel for the petitioner requests for an instalment facility to discharge the balance liability. Now that the amount remains unquantified I do not propose to pass an order as sought for. However, it will be open to the 1st respondent to consider this request and pass appropriate orders thereon. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-