IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2011 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7735 of 2011(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUNIL PHILIP S/O.P.C.PHILIP,PROPRIETOR, M/S.SUNIL AGENCY,ENATHU, ADOOR TALUK BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, PATHANAMTHITTA 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS)II COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI .C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.7735 OF 2011(N) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is mainly against Ext.P7, an order passed by the appellate authority on an application for stay filed by the petitioner along with the appeal. 2. Facts of the case are that aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P3 the petitioner filed Exts.P5 and P6 appeals. In the request for stay, Ext.P7 order was passed. The complaint of the petitioner is that in Ext.P7 order no reason has been stated and his contentions have not been dealt with. A reading of the impugned order shows that the petitioner is fully justified in this contention. 3. Having regard to the above, the writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P7 and directing the 2nd respondent to consider the stay petition filed by the petitioner afresh with notice to the petitioner. Fresh orders shall be passed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within one month of receipt of a copy of the judgment. In the meanwhile further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P2, P4 and P8 will stand stayed. Petitioner shall produce a coy of the judgment along with a coy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) vi JUDGE WPC.No. /09 :2 :