IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 WA.No. 401 of 2007() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.33579/2001 Dated 01/08/2006 .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- SALEESH K.S,S/O.SREEDHARAN,KOTTUNGAL HOUSE,VENGINISSERY VILLAGE,PARALAM P.O,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- 1. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,PALAKKAD 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,REVENUE RECOVERY THRISSUR. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,VENGINISSERY VILLAGE THRISSUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY,Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J -------------------------------- W.A.401/2007 -------------------------------- Dated this 3rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Koshy (Ag.C.J.) Appellant/petitioner is a business man dealing in firewood and timber. He participated in two timber auctions held by the Forest Department in the year 1997. He was the highest bidder and remitted half of the amount. But the balance amount was not deposited. Therefore, re-auction had to be conducted and the petitioner has been served with Exts.P3 and P4 calculation statements directing him to remit the amounts towards the loss caused to the Government. Since the amount was not paid, Ext.P7 Revenue Recovery notice was issued to him. Learned Judge found that the petitioner has failed to pay the amount in time and remove the timber, and therefore, respondents are entitled to conduct re-auction and recover the loss caused to the Government from the petitioner. Learned Judge held that the recovery of income tax as per Ext.P2 is unsustainable. It is further held that the recovery of forest development tax and the recovery of the sales tax proposed are also not W.A.401/2007 2 sustainable. We are of the view that if any loss is caused to the Government by the petitioner, he is free to question the amount mentioned in Exts.P3 and P4, and if the calculation made is different, that also can be questioned. Petitioner had to pay an amount of Rs.1 Lakh to avoid further recovery proceedings and if the amount is paid, further recovery shall be kept in abeyance. Petitioner should be given an opportunity of hearing regarding calculation of amounts as well as the recovery of forest development tax and the recovery of sales tax proposed in the notice. Petitioner should also be given an opportunity to question the correctness of the statement prepared by the Government. Fresh order should be passed by the Government within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Further recovery shall be subject to the fresh order to be passed by the Government. Writ appeal is disposed of as above. J.B.KOSHY, Acting Chief Justice V.GIRI, Judge mrcs