IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24380 of 2008(B) -------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- P.T. SHAMSUDHEEN, PUTHURATHODI, KODATHIPADI, MANNARKAD. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, MANNARKAD. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OTTAPPALAM. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No.24380 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT Prayer in the writ petition is to pass orders on Ext.P3. By Ext.P1 petitioner has been assessed to tax by the Tahsildar. Petitioner has preferred revision as Ext.P3 before the second respondent, namely, the Revenue Divisional Officer. According to the petitioner, the same is still pending. He relies on Ext.P4 Circular and a decision of this court in W.P. (C) No.36563 of 2007, which is produced as Ext.P5. 2. I heard learned Government Pleader also. He points out that Ext.P3 is dated 25.10.2006 and even if it is treated as a revision, it is barred. I do not know how the petitioner can seek a direction to consider Ext.P3. Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected without prejudice to the remedy available to the petitioner. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb