IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2008 / 6TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 24458 of 2007(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JOSE DEVASSY, S/O, DEVASSY, THEKKINEDATH HOUSE, POOVATHUSSERY, PARAKKADAVU P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUDHISH KUMAR SRI.K.B.DAYAL SRI.K.Y.TOMY RESPONDENT: ------------- THE TAHSILDAR, ALUVA TALUK, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24458 of 2007(J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: ONE OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED BETWEEN THE BUILDERS. EXT.P2: SALE DEED DATED 10.6.2004 SHOWING THE TRANSFER OF UNDIVIDED SHARE OF THE LANDED PROPERTY. EXT.P3: ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.2.2007 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, ALUVA. EXT.P4: DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 23.3.2007. EXT.P6: ORDER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 8.6.2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL ........ // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 24458 OF 2007 J ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 28th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Exts.P3, P4 and P6. By Exts.P3 and P4, the petitioner is assessed to building tax apparently rejecting the argument of the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to be assessed as per the explanation under section 2(e) of the Kerala Building Tax Act. The contention of the petitioner is that the matter is heard by one officer and the order is passed by another officer and that is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. Learned government pleader is unable to seriously dispute the proposition that under the Building Tax Act the person who hear the matter should pass the order. In such circumstances, Exts.P3 and P4 are liable to be quashed. Ext.P6 is an order passed in the rectification application filed by the petitioner. In view of the facts, I quash Exts.P3 and P4. The respondent will consider the matter afresh with an WPC.24458/07 : 2 : opportunity for hearing to the petitioner. The respondent will also take note of the directions issued by this Court in Bavasons Constructions (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala [2007 (3) KLT 101]. It is open to the petitioner to bring notice to the respondent the names of the flat owners in this regard. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks