IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 2583 of 2009(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. C.K. SURENDRAN, S/O. KUNJUKUNJU, CHAVARAMMAKKAL, PYNGANA, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. NAVAS, S/O. SHOUKATH, THOPPIL HOUSE, VANDANPATHAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. P.K. NISAJ, S/O. KASIM, PUTHEN VEETIL, MURIKALLUMPURAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. P.K. SULAIMAN, S/O. KASIM, PUTHEN VEETIL, AYSHA MANZIL, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL V.MOHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE INTELLIGNECE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM AT PALA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.C.K.GOVINDAN FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 2583 OF 2009 G ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Prayers in the writ petition are as follows. (i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P4 order issued to 2nd to 4th petitioners and Ext.P5 to P8 and to quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari; (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to comply with the mandatory requirements before passing a penalty order under section 70 of the KVAT Act. 2. Ext.P4 is an order by which the 1st petitioner is visited with a penalty under section 70 of the KVAT Act. It is stated that similar orders have been issued against other petitioners. 3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader. 4. The principal complaint of the petitioners is that the petitioners were not heard. This is denied. Ext.R2(c) is produced as the objection and Ext.R2(d) is produced to show that indeed the WPC.2583/09 : 2 : petitioners were heard. A reply is filed. I feel that this is a matter where the petitioners can be relegated to prefer appeal against the order which the learned Government Pleader points out as the remedy open to the petitioners. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of relegating the petitioners to prefer appeal against the order. It is ordered that recovery proceedings pursuant to Exts.P5 to P8 will be kept in abeyance for six weeks. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE