IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 29772 of 2011(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------- P.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O. PONNAPPAN PILLAI, AGED 44, RESIDING AT 8/175, KARUVELIPADY, COCHIN-5 BY ADVS. SRI.N.RATHEESH SMT.SUMA RATHEESH RESPONDENTS: ------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, RPERESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KOCHI TALUK, FORT KOCHI-682031. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THOPPUMPADY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM-682016. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. S. JAMAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: dlk WP(C).No. 29772 of 2011(V) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14-2-2001 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28-2-2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2A COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE 28-2-2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17-3-2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28-3-2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12-5-2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25-5-2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE dlk S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.29772 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of a building. The said building was assessed to building tax and the petitioner paid the same. Thereafter, the petitioner covered the roof of the building with truss work without enclosing the area, leaving the same as covered open space. Treating this as an additional construction, the 2nd respondent re-assessed the tax by Exts.P2 and P2 (a) taking into account the area covered by the truss work and directed the petitioner to pay additional tax. Although the petitioner took the contention that no building tax is payable in respect of area covered by the truss work if it is kept open as decided by this Court in State of Kerala v. Southern Fisheries Corporation [2011 (1) KLT 956], and that the Government had also issued a circular in terms of the said decision, the same was not accepted. The 2nd respondent took the stand that, that W.P.(C)No.29772 of 2011 -2- decision is confined to the parties to the case and that the Government circular does not have retrospective effect. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “a) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside Exhibit P5. b) direct the 2nd respondent to exclude the portion where tress work is made from assessment of tax and refix the assessment accordingly”” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. When this Court passes a judgment, that is the declaration of law and in all similar cases the ratio of that decision is applicable. The same shall be applied by all authorities in the State in all cases coming up before them. Simply because a person is not a party to that decision, he does not cease to be entitled to take advantage of the law laid down by this Court. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that the demand for building tax in respect of the area covered by the truss work is unsustainable. Accordingly Ext.P5 order is quashed. The 2nd respondent is W.P.(C)No.29772 of 2011 -3- directed to exclude the portion covered by the truss work for the purpose of assessment of building tax of the petitioner's building. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/