IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2010 / 9TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 32382 of 2004(E) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- JIJI VARGHESE, S/O. VARGHESE, AGED 40 YEARS, VALIYAKULAM HOUSE, KUNNUMMA VILLAGE, KUTTANAD TALUK, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE DY.TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY), KUTTANADU, ALAPPUZHA. 4. THE TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND INSPECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.SASIKUMAR R4 BY SRI.KOSHY GEORGE,SC,KTWWFB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.32382 OF 2004-E APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.9.2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 22.9.2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DT.5.10.2004 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE ADDL.MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALLEPPEY EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE DISTRICT COLLECTOR OF ALLEPPEY DT.5.10.2004 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.8.10.2004 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 28.12.05 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.60,000/- EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 2.12.06 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,000/- EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 7.8.06 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.51,000/- EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 1.7.05 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.54,000/- / TRUE COPY / P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 32382 OF 2004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 31st day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner is mainly with regard to the notice issued by the revenue authorities and the steps being pursued under Section 65 of the Revenue Recovery Act for causing the petitioner to be arrested and detained in civil prison, in respect of the arrears which is stated as due under the Kerala Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Act. 2. The sequence of events as narrated in the writ petition shows that the petitioner and six others were the licensees in favour of whom 124 Toddy shops in the Kuttanad Range were assigned to be conducted in the year 1998-99. It is stated that some shops were being run on loss and some default was there with regard to the payment of contribution to the Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund, leading to the proceedings issued under the Revenue Recovery Act at the instance of the 4th respondent, the Toddy Workers' Welfare Fund Inspector. Pursuant to the steps taken under the Revenue Recovery Act, the immovable WP(C) No.32382 of 2004 -:2:- properties of some other licensees were attached. It is stated that some of the properties have already been taken over by the Government as 'bought-in-land' under Section 50(2) of the Revenue Recovery Act, as there was no bidder. While so, the petitioner was served with Ext.P1 notice under Section 65 of the Revenue Recovery Act demanding a sum of Rs.12,23,378/-. The petitioner filed Ext.P3 objections along with Ext.P4 petition to give a copy of the statement of accounts and sought to be represented through the counsel by name, Mr.P.K.Mathew. The case of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent's office refused to accept the above proceedings sought to be filed by the petitioner, which made the petitioner to drop them in the complaint box, particularly since the 2nd respondent was not available in the office on the scheduled date. Subsequently, the petitioner was served with Ext.P5 notice to appear on 27.10.04, on which date, though the counsel for the petitioner appeared, he was denied entry to the chamber of the 2nd respondent, thus denying the opportunity to be represented by a lawyer. The 2nd WP(C) No.32382 of 2004 -:3:- respondent proceeded with further steps and warrant of arrest was issued, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this writ petition seeking to set aside Ext.P5, to recall the warrant and to permit the petitioner to be represented through the lawyer. 3. When the matter came up before this Court on 04.11.2004, an interim order of stay was granted originally for a period of two weeks directing the 2nd respondent to file a counter. The 2nd respondent in fact has filed a counter affidavit stating that the objection preferred by the petitioner is being considered and that there will not be any warrant of arrest and no further notice or order has been issued with regard to the arrest(Paragraph 6). Subsequently, the matter was again considered by this Court on 02.11.2006, whereby the concerned respondents were directed to proceed against the properties, to have them sold in public auction and to file a report. It is pointed out that the petitioner does not have any immovable property at all. WP(C) No.32382 of 2004 -:4:- 4. On 27.02.2007, this Court considered the prayer of the petitioner to be represented through a lawyer and an interim order was passed on that day, granting necessary relief in this regard. This being the position, the learned counsel submits that nothing further remains to be considered by this Court, but for giving appropriate direction to the 2nd respondent to finalise the proceedings which are still pending. The petitioner has effected various payments after the filing of the writ petition as borne by the contents of the reply affidavit and as revealed from Exts.P6 to P9 receipts. Further, substantial payments have also been effected by the concerned persons in the meanwhile; particulars of which are stated as available before the 2nd respondent. 5. Considering the limited extent of relief now pressed for and also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds that this matter need not be kept pending and appropriate direction could be issued to the 2nd respondent to have the same finalised. In the circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to finalise the proceedings pursuant to WP(C) No.32382 of 2004 -:5:- Ext.P5, taking note of the objections preferred by the petitioner and also giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner through his counsel as ordered by this Court by the interim order dated 27.02.07. The proceedings shall be finalised in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE ttb