1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN Writ Petition (MD)No.7005 of 2011 Ashok Kumar Cotton Traders, Rep.by its Proprietrix, K.Neelavathi, 23/3, Pugalanthi Road, Cotton Market, Rajapalayam – 626 117. ...Petitioner Vs. The Assistant Commissioner,(CT),(FAC), Rajapalayam. ... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned notice issued by the respondent in his Na.Ka.No.A3/1721/2010, dated 15.04.2011 served on the petitioner on 24.05.2011 for the assessment year 1992-93 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Mujibur Rahman For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Janarthanam, Additional Government Pleader. O R D E R The petitioner who is the proprietrix of the company has filed this writ petition on the ground that the impugned notice has brought a property to auction in respect of the amount of arrears due by the firm. The grievance of the petitioner is that the property which is now brought to auction does not belong to her for the arrears of the firm. Unfortunately, the present writ petition has been filed even after the deferral of the auction which was to be held on 23.06.2011 as per the impugned notice, dated 15.04.2011. Now, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the very notification on the ground that there will be a declaration that she is not the owner of the property and that the Department should not bring the property for auction. This Court fails to understand that how the petitioner is concerned with the property and the reason for the petitioner to object to bring the property for being auctioned. When the petitioner admits arrears, she is liable to pay and all it requires is that she should intimate the Department that the property which is now brought to auction does not belong to her. It is for the Department to verify whether it belongs to them on this day or previously any transfer has been made at any point of time. Therefore, intimation alone is enough. This intimation is now done as per the writ petition. The Department will take note of her objection and they will take necessary action for the recovery in the manner known to law. 2.With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( AS ) /TRUE COPY/ sms SUB ASST REGISTRAR To:: The Assistant Commissioner, (CT),(FAC), Rajapalayam. 1CC TO MR. A.A. MUJIBUR RAHMAN, ADVOCATE, SR: 20913: DM:2011:JULY:13 Writ Petition (MD)No.7005 of 2011 1P:3C:: 30.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/