IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2009 / 5TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17948 of 2009(K) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S.K.LINK HEALTH CARE(INDIA) PVT. LTD., 35/1854, A-7 SURABHI BUILDING, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER SRI.HARISEWAK SHARMA. BY ADV. MR.RAJU JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(INT.), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-682 030. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 17948 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 26 th June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Challenging the sustainability of the order imposing penalty upon the petitioner as per Ext.P1, the petitioner has approached the first respondent by filing Ext. P2 memorandum of appeal along with Ext.P3 petition for stay. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the petition for stay now stands posted to 01.07.2009, the respondents are proceeding with coercive steps invoking the relevant provisions under the Revenue Recovery Act, as evident from Ext. P4, which is sought to be intercepted by this Court in the present Writ Petition. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the first respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 memorandum of appeal as well as Ext.P3 petition for W.P.(C) No. 17948 OF 2009 2 stay, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. However, it is made clear that till such appropriate orders are passed on Ext. P3 petition for stay, all further coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner by virtue of Ext. P4 shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk