IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 19TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3987 of 2011(W) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ THE ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES LIMITED SWITCHGEAR DIVISION, MANNAR P.O, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR & COMPANY SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, SRI.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR A.K., SRI.JOHN MATHAI K., SRI.BENNY P.THOMAS, SRI.P. GOPINATH MENON, SRI.RAJAKANNAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (ASSMT) COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA- 688 001. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) KOLLAM- 690 013. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHENGANNUR- 689 121. 5. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, CHENGANNUR- 689 121, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.V.K. SHAMSUDHEEN. R5 BY ADV. MR.SATHISH NINAN, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 3987 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Against Exts.P2 and P3 orders of assessment finalised under the provisions of the KVAT and CST Act for the assessment year 2007-08, the petitioner had preferred Exts.P4 and P5 appeals before the 3rd respondent. Exts.P6 and P7 are the stay petitions filed along with the appeals. Grievance of the petitioner is that, pending consideration and disposal of the appeals and the accompanying applications, recovery steps has now been initiated and Ext.P8 notice was issued by the 4th respondent to the 5th respondent bank requiring to withhold operation of the bank account and to realise the amount due. 2. According to the petitioner, the action of the respondent is causing severe prejudice to the day to-day activity of the petitioner and such action was taken without considering pendency of the appeal before the 3rd respondent. Hence the petitioner seeks interference of this court to restrain the recovery steps, till the disposal of the appeals. WP(C) .3987/2011 2 3. It is also contended by the petitioner that the petitioner company being a sick industry is one coming within the purview of the Sick Industries Act, and as such recovery steps are prohibited under section 22 of the said Act. 4. Since the statutory appellate authority is in seizin of the matter, I am not proposing to enter upon any findings regarding merits of the contentions raised. I find that, interest of justice will be served, if the appellate authority is directed to consider and pass orders within a time frame. 5. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P6 and P7 stay petitions after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that, while considering interim relief, the 3rd respondent shall take note of the contentions raised by the petitioner as narrated above. 6. Till such time orders are passed as directed above, recovery of the amount covered under Exts.P2 and P3 which is now initiated through Ext.P8 notice shall be kept in abeyance. WP(C) .3987/2011 3 Needless to say that the petitioner shall be permitted to conduct operation in the Bank Account held with the 5th respondent Bank till such time. 7. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C) .3987/2011 4