IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 24TH JULY 2009 / 2ND SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20795 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SREERAM G. NAIR, AGED 18, S/O. GOPINATHAN NAIR R, SREERANJINI, SASTHAMCOVIL ROAD, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -14. 2. SREEDEVI G NAIR, AGED 14, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND GUARDIAN, SMT. GEETH VASANTH, SREERANJINI, SASTHAMCOVIL ROAD, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -14. BY ADV. MR. T.M.CHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, WORKS CONTRACT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 20795 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 24th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT The grievance projected by the petitioners is that, their properties are being proceeded against by the respondents, particularly second and third respondents, for realization of the amount stated as due from M/s Vasant Apartments Private Limited, in respect of the sales tax arrears. The petitioner has asserted in the opening paragraph of the Writ Petition that, the petitioners have no connection with M/s Vasanth Hotels (P) Ltd or M/s Vasanth Apartments and Construction Pvt. Ltd., though father and mother of the petitioners were Directors of M/s Vasanth Hotels Private Limited. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners have already approached the 3rd respondent to bring out the actual facts and figures to his notice, which was responded as per Ext.P2 informing the first petitioner that he might contact the Revenue Authorities since the necessary requisition has already been made by the Sales Tax Authorities and the matter is actually pending before the Revenue Authorities. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, they have approached the first respondent/District Collector by filing Ext.P1 representation highlighting their grievance and the only prayer in the Writ Petition is for a direction WP (C) No. 20795 of 2009 : 2 : to the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits that, the alleged grievance of the petitioners can only be premature, in so far as no document has been produced along with the Writ Petition to show that the revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated against the petitioners or their property. In any view of the matter, the fact remains that the petitioners or their properties cannot be proceeded against if they are not defaulters in any manner or unless and until it is shown that they have obtained the properties from the defaulters during the pendency of the proceedings. 3. In the above circumstances, this Court finds it fit and proper to have the matter finalized by directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P1. Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 representation in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the first petitioner (who has preferred Ext.P1), which shall be be finalized as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd