IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2009 / 10TH ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 1333 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.26085/2007 Dated 24/08/2007 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS 2 &3 IN THE WP(C) ------------------------------------------- 1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUMARADI VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER &1ST RESPONDENT IN THE WPC ---------------------------------------------------- 1. C.I.MOHANAN, S/O.ITTAN KUNJU, CHENNATTU MALIKAYIL, MANNATHOOR PO, THIRUMARADI VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM,. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KAMMOOR BRANCH, ERNAKULAM DIST. ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN FOR R2 SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW FOR R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.A. No.1333 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 1st July, 2009. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. C.M.Appln.No.619/09 : This is a petition to condone the delay of 605 days in filing the appeal. On merits it is seen that the grievance of the Government pertains to the right to levy collection charges in revenue recovery proceedings. The learned Single Judge has held that “if payments are made voluntarily, no collection charges should be recovered from the petitioner.” This court has already held that in case the recovery is effected after issuance of notice under Sections 7 and 34 of the Revenue Recovery Act, there shall not be any collection charges. However, in case the revenue recovery authorities have taken further coercive steps for the collection of the amounts due, then alone the question of recovery arises. Therefore, we do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment. It is made clear that taking note of the factual situation pertained to the recovery, it will be open to the Government to take appropriate action with notice to the writ WA NO.1333/09 2 petitioner also. In that view of the matter, it is not necessary to condone the delay and consider the writ appeal on merits. The delay petition as well as the appeal are hence dismissed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.1333 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 1st July, 2009.