IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2011 / 10TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 10305 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE ARCH DIOCESE OF ERNAKULAM-ANGAMALY, REP.BY FR.MATHEW MANAVALAN,AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.VAREED PARIYADAN,ARCHBISHOP'S HOUSE,BROADWAY, ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-31,POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER TO ARCHBISHOP VARKEY CARDINAL VITHAYATHIL, ARCHBISHOP'S HOUSE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY ADV. SRI.JIMMY JOHN VELLANIKARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), ALUVA, PIN 683101. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, (P.H.DIVISION), WATER AUTHORITY, ALUVA, PIN 683101. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN 682030. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL SRI.M.DINESH - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10305 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.11.2.2011 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.24.4.2009 EXT.P3: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE IN FORM NO.1 DTD.24.4.2009 EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.22.3.2011 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.10305 of 2011-K ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Revenue recovery steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P3 notice for realising arrears of 'water charges' due to the 2nd respondent, is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. According to the petitioner, he is not liable for payment of the amounts under demand and that the arrears claimed are not true and correct. However it is stated that, against Ext.P3, the petitioner had submitted objections before respondents 1 and 2, as evidenced from Ext.P4. Since the coercive steps were pursued without considering such objections, the petitioner is seeking interference of this court. 2. Heard; standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. It is pointed out that under Regulation 15 and 17 of the Kerala Water Authority Water Supply Regulations, an appeal can be preferred against the demand for 'water charges' before the Executive Engineer of the Kerala Water Authority having jurisdiction in the area concerned. Therefore, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if the said authority is W.P(C) No.10305 of 2011-K 2 directed to look into the matter and to take an appropriate decision. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to forward Ext.P4 objections to the competent authority under the above said regulations for an adjudication on the dispute. Needless to say that the competent authority shall consider such objections and take appropriate decision, after affording a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate his claims. 4. In order to facilitate the competent authority to take a decision on the subject matter, further recovery steps are directed to be kept in abeyance till then, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.50,000/- within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab