IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 34091 of 2010(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S. KALIKA HOTEL & BAR, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING PARTNER P.P. JOBY, AGED 34, S/O.POOKKODAN FRANCIS, POOKODAN HOUSE, VENDOR, ALAGAPPA NAGAR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN, SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH). RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEAL), COMMERCIAL TAX, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C. K. ABDUL REHIM, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 34091 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 11th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by assessments completed under the provisions of the KGST Act as well as KAVAT Act, the petitioner had preferred Exts.P2 and P5 statutory appeals before the 3rd respondent. Exts.P3 and P6 are stay petitions filed along with the appeals. It is submitted that the appeals as well as stay petitions are pending consideration and disposal before the 3rd respondent. Grievance of the petitioner is that without considering pendency of the appeals and the accompanying petitions, recovery of the amount in dispute has now been initiated pursuant to Ext.P8 notice, issued under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Hence, the petitioner seeks direction to restrain recovery steps till the disposal of the appeal. 2. Heard; learned Government Pleader. It is submitted that there may be delay in filing the appeals and the petitioner has not stated as to whether any petition seeking condonation of delay was filed. W.P.(C) No. 34091/2010 2 3. However, since the statutory appellate authority is in seizin of the matter, I am of the view that writ petition can be disposed of directing that authority to consider and dispose of the matter at an early date. 4 In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P3 and P6 stay petitions filed along with Exts.P2 and P5 appeals, if the appeals are in order, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. Till such time orders are passed by the 3rd respondent as directed above, realization of amounts covered under Exts.P2 and P5 appeals, which is now sought to be recovered through Ext.P8 notice, shall be kept in abeyance The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent. C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. mn.