IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2008 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1929 W.P.(C).No. 5881 of 2008(A) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- P.V.CHANDRAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, PILICODE VAYAL HOUSE, PILICODE, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.ABDUL AZEEZ RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER NORTH ZONE, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KASARAGOD. 4. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), HOSDURG. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =================== W.P.(C) NO. 5881 OF 2008 A =================== Dated this the 22ndday of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T The controversy in this writ petition arises out of Ext.P4 order in RP No.829/07 in WA No.2425/06. In the order, it was directed that “if the petitioner pays the tax demanded within a period of six weeks from today, in the event of which penalty, if any, imposed will be deleted”. The date of the order being 25th of September, 2007, petitioner ought to have paid the tax within six weeks from that date. It is only on such payment, could the petitioner claim waiver of penalty. 2. Admittedly, even as on date, payment has not been made by the petitioner. On the other hand, he makes a vague averment that he approached the respondents several times. He has not even stated as to when such approach was made. Therefore, there is non compliance of the direction contained in Ext.P2, the review order. WPC 5881/08 : 2 : 3. It is on account of such default that Ext.P4 sale notice is now issued not only for the tax but also for recovering the penalty amount. Since payment has not been made as directed in Ext.P3, I cannot find any fault with the respondents in issuing Ext.P4. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE Rp