IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2010 / 1ST SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23143 of 2010(P) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- K. GANESHAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMA PODUVAL, SREE GANESH TIMBER & TILES, ANNUR PO, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE, SRI.M.M.ANTO, SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,TAX DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER IV, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INT) COMMERCIAL TAXES, KANNUR-1. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KANNUR-1. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 23143 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: (i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to call for the records leading to the issuance of Ext.P1 notice and to quash the same and all further proceedings thereto; (ii) To declare that the inspection conducted by the 2nd respondent is based, illegal and not reliable. (iii) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 request for summoning the witnesses with documents and also Ext.P4 copy application expeditiously at any rate before the hearing of the case and to provide an opportunity to submit further objections after the perusal of documents obtained through Exts.P3 and P4 before the hearing; (iv) Grant such other and further reliefs which are just and necessary. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner will be satisfied if the 2nd respondent is directed to consider Exts.P3 and P4 and pass appropriate orders thereon, this Court finds that there is no necessity to go into the merits of the case for the time being. In the said circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P3 and P4, in accordance with law before final orders are passed pursuant to Exts.P1 and P8. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc