IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 21152 of 2008(R) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ JOEMON RAJAN MANGALY, PROPRIETOR, MANGALY ROCK PRODUCTS, THURAVOOR.P.O, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ANGAMALY. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.II, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERY AT KARUKUTTY. 3. TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, ALUVA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 21152 OF 2008 R -------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th August, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Exts.P6, P6(a), P6(b) & P6(c) and seeks a direction to the second respondent to supply copies of the Certificates issued by the Assistant Engineer, KSEB, Thuravoor and Reports obtained from the Mining and Geology Department and Industries Department referred to in Exts.P6 to P6(c). 2. Petitioner's case, in brief, is as follows: Petitioner is running a crusher unit. It is the case of the petitioner that an inspection was conducted on 23.4.2007 as evidenced by Ext.P1 Report which, inter alia, shows that the petitioner has not employed any primary crusher unit. However, petitioner came to be served with notices to which he sent Ext.P3 series of replies and without considering his replies, the first respondent issued Ext.P4 series of revised notices for the years 2001 - 2002 to 2004 - 2005 again proposing to impose WPC.21152/08 R 2 penalty on the petitioner to which the petitioner has filed objection vide Ext.P5. It is stated that without considering the objections. Exts.P6 series of penalty orders came to be issued. 3. The principal complaint of the petitioner is that the authority has relied on the Certificate issued by the Assistant Engineer, KSEB, Thuravoor as per which the connected load of the petitioner's unit is taken as 28 HP. It is further stated that reliance is placed on the enquiry made with the Mining & Geology Department and suppression of turnover is worked out and the production estimated and penalty imposed. It is submitted that though the petitioner raised a complaint against the non-service of the Certificate and also the Report of the enquiry with the Mining & Geology Department, in breach of the principles of natural justice, the same was denied. It is the case of the respondents that actually whatever was enquired and ascertained from the Mining & Geology Department as also the contents of the Certificate, were brought to the notice of the petitioner through the revised notices issued to the petitioner. WPC.21152/08 R 3 No doubt, learned counsel for petitioner would point out that the petitioner ought to have been given an opportunity to cross- examine the Officer of the Electricity Board who issued the certificate. 4. A Counter Affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 producing Ext.R1(a) to R1(h). Petitioner has filed a Reply Affidavit also. I feel that this is a case where the petitioner has a remedy of preferring statutory Appeal and I feel that the petitioner can raise the issues which have been raised before the authority as well. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy open to him and he is given three weeks' time from today to prefer Appeals against the impugned orders. If the petitioner prefers Appeals within a period of three weeks from today before the Appellate Authority under the Act, the same will be entertained and the matter considered on merits after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is also open to the petitioner to seek interim orders by filing WPC.21152/08 R 4 appropriate applications. Coercive steps against the petitioner will be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks from today. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy// PS to Judge