IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2008 / 16TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 19390 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ T.C.GEORGE, THEKKEKUTTU, MANARCADU KARA, MANARCADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.RAJEEV V.KURUP RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (REVENUE RECOVERY) KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV.SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN FOR R1-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 19390 OF 2008 G ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 7th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by proceedings under section 65 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act and he seeks a direction not to arrest and detain him without complying with the provisions under the R.R. Act. He also seeks a direction to serve a copy of the order and to afford an opportunity to adduce evidence on his plea of no means. Case of the petitioner in brief is as follows. Petitioner was conducting a small unit from 1990 to 1992. He could not manage the unit as his wife was ill and she died due to Cancer. So, he had entrusted the unit with one Guptha. Sri. Guptha had defaulted payment of sales tax and he left Kerala. According to the petitioner, Rs.3,06,332/- is due as sales tax arrears. By Ext.P1 dated 23.1.2008 the 2nd respondent decided to initiate proceedings under section 65 of the R.R. Act. By Ext.P2, Form-19 notice is issued calling upon the petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent on 5.2.2008. Petitioner appeared and filed objection. Ext.P3 is a notice dated 26.4.2008 calling upon the WPC.19390/08 : 2 : petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent on 14.5.2008. According to the petitioner, he preferred Ext.P4 application dated 14.5.2008. It is the specific case of the petitioner that when, pursuant to Ext.P3, the petitioner appeared in person on 14.5.2008, the 2nd respondent, District Collector, was not present in his office and the matter was taken up before the Deputy Collector(RR) on 14.5.2008 itself. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. A statement has been filed by the respondents in which it is, inter alia, stated as follows: “ The defaulter was heard on 5.2.08, 14.5.08 and he was given an opportunity to clear the arrears. But the petitioner has not taken any steps to remit the dues to Government. Considering all the above factors, the 2nd respondent has arrived in the reasonable conclusion that the petitioner is willfully withholding the payment of the dues to Government. The provisions under section 65 of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act 1968, invoked against him and warrant issued which will be executed through Superintendent of Police, Kottayam.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had appeared on 14.5.2008 but the District Collector, 2nd WPC.19390/08 : 3 : respondent, was not available. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner may be given an opportunity to adduce evidence and a decision may be taken in the matter. The petitioner also relied on some rulings of this Court in support of his case. 4. Having heard both parties, I feel that the petitioner should be given an opportunity to adduce whatever material he wants to adduce before the authority and a decision should be taken by the 2nd respondent. In order to facilitate the disposal of the matter at the earliest, the petitioner will be present before the 2nd respondent on 20.8.2008. It is open to the petitioner to adduce any evidence as he advised. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent will consider the matter and take a decision in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner also. It is open to the District Collector to provide an opportunity which is contemplated under the proviso to section 65 of the R.R. Act. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE