IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2009 / 10TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 6157 of 2008(G) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JANASEVA SISUBHAVAN, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, JOSE MAVELI. BY ADV. SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE SECRETARY, NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR PROMOTION OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC WELFARE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. ERNAKULAM. ADV. MR.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.6157/2008. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION. P2:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AS FOUNDLING HOME. P3:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICTE OF RECOGNITION AS ORPHANAGE. P4:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISISUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN DT. 16.5.06. P5:- COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD DT. 27.4.07. P6:- COPY OF THE REMINDER DT. 30.1.07. P7:- COPY OF THE REMINDER DT. 16.4.07. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 6157 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT The only grievance of the petitioner now projected before this Court is in respect of the callous inaction on the part of the second respondent in considering the application preferred by the petitioner seeking for sanction for tax exemption under Section 35 AC of the Income Tax Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the said application was very much served to the department as borne by Ext.P5 Postal acknowledgment card. That apart, the petitioner has also preferred Ext.P6 and P7 reminders referring to the pendency of the applications and seeking to have a finality on the subject matter. 2. No counter affidavit has been filed from the part of the respondents. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the second respondent, to consider the petitions as above and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc