IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 8TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30165 of 2010(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- M/S.CHRISTIAN MISSION HOSPITAL, M.C.ROAD, PANDALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY T.J.ITTY EIPE. BY ADVS. SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR, SRI.JAIRAM V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA AT CHENGANNUR. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM. 4. THE MANAGER, SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., PANDALAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN R4 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.30165 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Through Ext.P6 order, penalty to the tune of Rs.1,75,010/- was imposed on the petitioner, under Section 47(6) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Against Ext.P6 the petitioner had already preferred Ext.P7 statutory appeal before the 3rd respondent. A stay petition was also filed as per Ext.P8, along with the appeal. It is pointed out that the amount covered under Ext.P6 remains secured, by virtue of Bank Guarantee furnished by the petitioner for releasing the goods at the stage of detention. It is evident from Ext.P5 that the petitioner had produced Bank Guarantee for the said amount, on 19.12.2009. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that without considering pendency of the appeal, Ext.P9 was issued by the 2nd respondent requesting realisation of the Bank Guarantee. Hence the petitioner is seeking directions W.P.(C).30165/10-U -2- to restrain realisation of the Bank Guarantee till disposal of the appeal. 3. Heard, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. Considering pendency of the statutory appeal, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the appellate authority to have an early disposal of the matter. 4. Accordingly the 3rd respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 appeal after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. Till such time orders are passed on the appeal the Bank Guarantee mentioned in Ext.P5 shall not be recovered, provided the petitioner keep the same alive if necessary by renewal. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb