IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2011 / 31ST BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 6670 of 2011(G) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- ANITHA.S., W/O.SUKUMARAN, AGED 40 YEARS, SANTHOSH NIVAS, KULAMVETTIVILA, KALLAYAM, NEDUMANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.TRIPTEN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, SUB R.T.OFFICE, NEDUMANGAD, PIN 695541. 2. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER (RURAL), ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695101. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, VATTAPPARA VILLAGE OFFICE, NEDUMANGAD, PIN 695541. 4. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, NEDUMANGAD, PIN 695541. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. JAMES MATHEW KADAVAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: STU WPC NO. 6670/2011 G APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PAGES OF THE R.C. BOOK OF THE PETITIONER'S VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. KL 01 QU 2407 CONTRACT CARRIAGE BENZ 407 MINI BUS. P2 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD 18/02/2011. P3 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD 22/01/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT'S OFFICE. P4 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE D.D. DTD 21/01/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE STU S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.6670 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges demand for motor vehicle tax on the ground that the petitioner has already submitted 'G' forms seeking exemption for the period in question. On 11.4.2011, this Court has passed the following interim order: “Post after vacation. Meanwhile 2nd respondent is directed to take a decision on exemption application if any, pending and the vehicle shall be released to the petitioner on the petitioner remitting arrears if any, after adjudication of the exemption application.” Admittedly, the petitioner has not complied with the directions in the said order. Further the 1st respondent has filed a statement wherein it is stated that the tax demanded is for the period from 01.10.2005 to 30.06.2009 not covered by any 'G' Forms. The petitioner has not sought to controvert the averments by filing a reply affidavit. In the above circumstances, there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/