IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2010 / 4TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 18521 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- NISHA THOMAS, W/O.P.I.THOMAS, AGED 43 YEARS, TEACHER, PANAKKAL HOUSE, YESUDAS ROAD, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, (INVESTIGATION BRANCH), COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.18521 of 2010-M ---------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T Challenging the condition imposed upon the petitioner, directing to satisfy 50% of the penalty in respect of the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98, under the KGST Act, so as to avail the benefit of interim stay, during the pendency of the appeal, as ordered by the concerned authority vide Ext.P6; the petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing W.P(C) No.29548 of 2007; which led to Ext.P7 judgment, whereby the condition was modified and inspite of 50%, the petitioner was directed to deposit 25% and the matter was directed to be considered and finalised. 2. Pursuant to Ext.P7 judgment, notices were issued as borne by Ext.P8 and P9 and later, the matter was finalised as per Ext.P10 dated 12.3.2010, whereby the Revision Petitions were dismissed. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the said order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as the date of hearing scheduled on 10.3.2010 was never let known to the petitioner at any point of time, which hence is W.P(C) No.18521 of 2010-M 2 under challenge in this Writ Petition. 3. The learned Government Pleader, with reference to the statement filed by the third respondent submits that, notice of hearing was sent to the counsel for the petitioner by name G.Mohandas, as revealed from Ext.R3(a) postal acknowledgment card. Since the said notice was served on 1.3.2010, the hearing conducted on 10.3.2010 is very much in order and since there was no appearance or representation from the part of the petitioner, the matter was finalised leading to Ext.P10 which is also stated as beyond challenge. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has already changed his Lawyer by changing vakalath and another learned counsel by name Jacob Mathew, had already entered appearance and filed ‘vakalath’ before the concerned authority. It was without taking note of the said fact; that the notice was sent to the former counsel. 5. In the above circumstances, the concerned authority is directed to re-consider Ext.P9 and pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of hearing the petitioner. Final order as above shall be passed, in accordance with law, as expeditiously, as W.P(C) No.18521 of 2010-M 3 possible at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab