IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 16TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2346 of 2008(D) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER: --------------------- NAZEERA HASSAN, BEST TIMBER PRODUCTS, K.P.III/42, K.P. ROAD, THURAVOOR P.O., CHERTHALA-688 532. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHAN SRI.S.SOMAN SRI.G.JAYANANDA PAI RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- AIT & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,KUTHIATHODE BY GP. SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ========================= WRIT PETITION NO.2346 OF 2008 ========================= Dated this the 5th day of February 2008 JUDGMENT An application for registration under the CST Act and KVAT Act made by the petitioner has been rejected by Ext.P8 which is under challenge. In Ext.P8, after extracting the reply submitted by the petitioner and stating that the reply filed by the applicant is not convincing, the application has been rejected. A reading of Ext.P8 shows that the respondent has not any reasons to reject the application submitted. 2. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing, though the learned Government Pleader sought to sustain Ext.P8 by referring to Circular No.10/2006, I am not inclined to advert to the contentions, so long as such grounds are not relied on or dealt with by the respondents in Ext.P8. 3. It is settled law that the validity of an order has to be judged on the contents of the order itself. For these reasons, Ext.P8 will stand quashed and the first respondent shall reconsider the application made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon with notice to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE css/