IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 30TH AUGUST 2010 / 8TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 275 of 2007(G) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAJI K.N., KUZHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLISSERY, PADUVAPURAM P.O., ANGAMALY. BY ADV. SRI.RENNY AUGUSTINE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SALES TAX OFFICER (WC & LT), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MATTANCHERRY. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-15. 4. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, ALUVA. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER, KARUKUTTY. 6. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PAINAVU, IDUKKI. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.PRADEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 275 of 2007 G ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 30th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging Ext.P2 assessment order passed by the assessing authority and the steps taken by the respondents to realise the amounts stated as due, notwithstanding the pendency of the appeal before the appellate authority and the direction given by this Court vide Ext.P1 judgment to consider and finalise the appeal, simultaneously directing to keep the recovery proceedings pending till such time. 2. The matter was admitted on 09-01-2007 and an interim stay was granted as prayed for, for a period of two weeks which, however, is not seen extended thereafter. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that Ext.P3 appeal preferred by the petitioner was heard by the appellate authority on 10-01-2007 and final orders were passed on 12-01-2007, whereby Ext.P2 assessment order was set aside in respect of the assessment year 1999-2000 and the matter was remanded to be re-considered by the assessing authority and to pass revised/modified assessment order in the manner as WPC.275/07 : 2 : prescribed therein. The learned Government Pleader also submits that by virtue of the appellate order passed by the third respondent, the challenge against the recovery proceedings has lost significance and the petitioner has not come up with any further grievance and this being the position, the matter has become infructuous. There is no representation for the petitioner as well. It appears that the petitioner does not have any further grievance. As such, the writ petition is closed without prejudice to the rights and liabilities of the petitioner if at all any further grievance is there. (P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) aks