IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37774 of 2008(V) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MEENA VASANTH, W/O.LATE B.RAMANUJAM THAMPI, VASANTH VIHAR, KOCHUPILAMOOD, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. ASST.COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), COMMERCIAL TAXES SPECIAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. BANK OF BARODA, OPP. SUDARSAN HOTEL, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 37774 OF 2008 V -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th January, 2009 JUDGMENT The prayer in the Writ Petition is as follows: “Direct the 2nd respondent to auction the property in Sy. No.583/18 of Eravipuram Village of Kollam Taluk and to adjust the proceeds from such auction to the liability of the petitioner as per Ext.P6 expeditiously by the issue of a writ of mandamus or such other writ, order or direction.” 2. By Ext.P6, the petitioner was intimated to effect payment under the Amnesty Scheme 2008 - 2009. Petitioner filed Ext.P7 on 15.12.2008. The request in Ext.P7 is to the fifth respondent Bank for permission to have one of the properties mortgaged with the fifth respondent sold and the proceeds utilised for clearing the amounts under Ext.P6. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the amounts as per Ext.P6 have not been paid. In the light of this and in the facts of WPC.37774/08 V 2 this case, I would see that there is no merit in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge