IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2011 / 14TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 9876 of 2011(H) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- CYBELE HERBAL LABORATORIES (P) LTD., REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR, P.N.BALARAM, 'NIRMALYAM', GREEN PARK, TRICHUR. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN SRI.S.SUJITH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, OFFICE OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ERNAKULAM - 682 020. 3. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM - 682 015. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 9876/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF LETTER DATED 27/01/1999 SENT TO THE SALES TAX OFFICER. P2: COPY OF APPEAL DATED 24/04/2009 FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.3. P3: COPY OF ORDER DATED 29/01/2003 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26/06/2004 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF LETTER DATED 14/07/2004 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF APPEAL DATED 14/07/2004 SENT BY THE PETITIONER. P7: COPY OF LETTER DATED 22/07/2004 SENT TO RESPONDENT NO.1 P8: COPY OF LETTER DATED 01/02/2005 SENT BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE PETITIONER. P9: COPY OF LETTER DATED 09/02/2005 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE PETITIONER. P10: COPY OF LETTER DATED 03/08/2009 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. P11: COPY OF LETTER RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON 27/10/2009 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDNET. P12: COPY OF LETTER DATED 15/02/2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT NO.1. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 9876 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act who started a factory in a building leased from one K.R. Vijayan. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to sales tax exemption under SRO No.1729/2003, the claim for which was rejected. Against the rejection, the petitioner has filed Ext.P6 appeal. In the meanwhile, assessment orders were passed by the assessing authority under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, in respect of the petitioner without taking into account the exemption claimed. Against the same, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal. The petitioner's grievance is that if Ext.P2 appeal is heard before Ext.P6 appeal against Ext.P3 order rejecting the claim for exemption is disposed of the petitioner would be greatly prejudiced. In the above circumstances, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “i. Call for the records relating to Exhibits P1 to P12; ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner against Ext.P3 order; W.P.(C)No. 9876 of 2011 -2- iii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondent No.1 to dispose of Ext.P6 appeal treating it as filed in time, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner; iv. stay all further proceedings in Ext.P2 appeal pending before the respondent No.3; v. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order to grant all the benefits of one time settlement which is in force till 31.3.2011 or the extended period;” The learned Government Pleader submits that, there is no delay in dealing with the matter at all and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The 1st respondent shall see that the State Level Committee competent to dispose of Ext.P6 appeal, considers and passes orders on Ext.P6 appeal, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the meanwhile, the 3rd respondent shall postpone hearing of Ext.P2 appeal for a period of four months. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/