IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 5537 of 2009(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M/S.SURYA TOWERS, ANGAMALY REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER. MANOJ ANTONY, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY, PUTHAN HOUSE, SURYA TOWERS. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 5537 of 2009-J ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 24th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The matter is taken up by consent for final hearing. Petitioner challenges Ext.P3. Ext.P3 is an order passed by the District Collector, Ernakulam under Section 13 of the Kerala Building Tax Act rejecting the revision petition filed by the petitioner exparte. It is stated that during adjourned date both the revision petitioner and the counsel were seen absent. It is stated that when the matter was posted for hearing on 17.12.2008 the counsel for the petitioner was absent and the matter was adjourned to 21.1.2009. It is stated that on 17.12.2008 petitioner was personally present, but the counsel conducting the case was not present as he was out of station. The case was adjourned to 21.1.2009 as requested by the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the said posting date was intimated to the WPC No.5537/2009 -2- counsel. But, due to an inadvertent mistake it was wrongly noted as 21.2.2009 and that is how the absence is explained. 2. I feel that an opportunity is to be granted to the petitioner and the matter decided on merits after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to make his submissions. Accordingly, Ext.P3 is quashed. Petitioner or his representative will be present before the District Collector, Ernakulam on 5.3.2009 at 11 A.M. The respondent will proceed to hear either the petitioner or his counsel and take a decision in the matter in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS