IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 20039 of 2008(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- M/S. HOTEL DOUBLOON, KALLAMBALAM.P.O, TRIVANDRUM DT. PIN-695 605, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, R. MANILAL. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR SRI.KURYAN THOMAS RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) III, SPECIAL CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, CHIRAYINKAL, TRIVANDRUM DT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No. 20039 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: First respondent passed Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders for the years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. Third respondent issued Exts.P4 and P5 revenue recovery notices pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2. The fourth respondent Collector passed Ext.P6 order dated 26.2.2008 attaching the business of the petitioner. By Ext.P3 order the appellate authority set aside Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders and the matter is being remitted to re-do the assessments. According to the petitioner, thereupon Exts.P4 to P6 notices have become infructuous. According to the petitioner, by Ext.P7 the first respondent informed the third respondent that the appellate authority has directed to re-do the matter and therefore the revenue recovery proceedings are to be kept in abeyance. Petitioner thereupon submitted Ext.P8 representation before the fourth respondent praying to lift the attachment. According to the petitioner, it has undertaken not to transfer the ownership of the hotel until fresh assessment orders are passed. It is also pointed out that in view of the attachment, the bank of the petitioner is refusing to extend facilities to it. WPC.20039/2008. 2 2. Heard learned Government Pleader also. 3. I feel that in the circumstances, a decision should be taken at the earliest on Ext.P8 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also to the first respondent. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the fourth respondent to consider and take a decision on Ext.P8 in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the first respondent as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb