IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32924 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.A.ANTONY, S/O.K.A.AUGUSTINE, KALLUVEETTIL HOUSE, KADAMAKUDY, PIZHALA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.VINOD BHAT RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR (REVENUE AUTHORITY), ERNAKULAM-682030. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM-682011. BY G.P.SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADEKKEL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 32924 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT The matter arises under the Keala Building Tax Act, 1975. The 1st respondent, the revisional authority had rejected the revision petition filed by the petitioner on 16-9- 2010, alleging non-payment of 50% of the tax amount as required under section 13(4) of the Kerala Building Tax Act. The petitioner had produced Ext.P2(a) receipt dated 9-2- 2009 evidencing that one quarterly instalment as prescribed under Ext.P1 was already paid on that day. Further Ext.P3 is produced to show that the second instalment was paid on 26-8-2010. It is stated that the Village Officer concerned has already issued a report dated 26-8-2010 to the 1st respondent certifying that 50% of the amount has already been paid. 2. It s evident that the rejection of revision petition was without taking note of Ext.P2(a), P3 and P4. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the order under which the revision W.P.(C) No. 32924/10 2 petition was rejected need be set aside and the 1st respondent need be directed to consider the revision on its merits. 3. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P5 is hereby quashed. The 1st respondent is directed to restore the revision on its files and dispose of the same on merits, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is also directed that realization of the balance 50% of the tax amount under Ext.P1, shall be kept in abeyance till the disposal of the revision petition. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. mn.