IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9574 of 2008(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SREEDHARAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.LATE CHATHUNNY, ANALIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHEMBUCHIRA P.O, MATTATHOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TAXES (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASST.EXCISE COMMISSIONER, O/O THE ASST.EXCISE COMMISSIONER, THRISSUR. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, VATANAPPALLY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.9574 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 27th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T During the year 2005-06 in auctions conducted for sale of toddy shops in Vatanappally Excise Range in Thrissur Division, there were no takers. Therefore, the Government decided to relax conditions for auction and Ext.P1 Government order was passed, wherein relaxed conditions for auction were laid down. In accordance with the relaxed conditions, the petitioner participated in the auction and was granted licence. One of the relaxations was that the licensee would be exempted from payment of tree tax. Thereafter, there was no auction for 2006-07. The Government directed that the Excise policy for the year 2005-06 will continue for the year 2006-07 also. Accordingly, the petitioner's licence was renewed for 2006-07 also. The petitioner did not pay any tree tax since, according to him, the renewal of licence was also on the same conditions as for the previous year. However, to the surprise of the petitioner, now the petitioner has been served with recovery notice for recovery of tree tax for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The petitioner is challenging the same. Ext.P3 is the recovery notice received by the petitioner in that regard. The petitioner is challenging the same. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 5, in which it is admitted that the petitioner is not liable to pay tree tax for the year 2005-06. But the respondents have taken a stand that for the year 2006-07 since there was no exemption from tree tax 2 granted, the petitioner is liable to pay tree tax for that year. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. The petitioner was originally granted licence for the year 2005-06. Admittedly after grating exemption from tree tax the very same policy continued for the year 2006-07 also and the petitioner's licence was renewed as the holder of the licence for the previous year. The petitioner had never been informed that such renewal of licence is with the condition that he would be liable to pay tree tax. When licence is renewed, it must be presumed that such renewal is on the same terms and conditions as for the previous year. If that be so, the same exemption applicable to the licence for the 2005-06 licence, is applicable to 2006-07 also. In that view, I am satisfied that the petitioner cannot be made to pay tree tax for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07. Accordingly, Ext.P3 is quashed. It is declared that the petitioner cannot be denied the preferential right for getting allotment of the said toddy shop as per clause 11 of the Abkari Policy for the year 2008-09 on the ground that the petitioner has not paid tree tax for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The petitioner would be entitled to all consequential benefits of such declaration in respect of the licence for the year 2009-2010, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible for the same. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 3