IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 5794 of 2008(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ BABU ANTONY, NADAKKAPARAMBU HOUSE, PATHIRAPALLY, AMBALAPUZHA, PROPRIETOR, NATIONAL MACHINES AND EMPLOYMENT CONSULTANTS, A.S.ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC OFFICE, OPPOSITE MUSEUM JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 4. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR, AMBALAPUZHA TALUK. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER, ARYAD SOUTH VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.5794 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner complains that in pursuance of revenue recovery action initiated against him, he is sought to be evicted from his property. It is stated that revenue recovery proceedings were initiated earlier for realising sales tax dues for the year 1997-1998. According to him, his appeal was allowed by Ext.P1 order of the Tribunal and that the revision filed by him against the revenue recovery proceedings also has been allowed by Ext.P3 order of the Land Revenue Commissioner. The petitioner complains that it is despite all this, coercive action is initiated against him based on Ext.P2. 2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that following Ext.P1 order of the Tribunal, the assessment has to be revised and that once revised assessment order is issued, fresh action will be taken for realisation of the dues. It is also submitted that in case the attempt fails, only thereafter revenue recovery proceedings will be initiated. WPC5794/2008 2 From the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, it is evident that presently there is no coercive action as apprehended by the petitioner. Therefore, clarify that only after revision of the assessment order, pursuant to Ext.P1, proceedings against the petitioner will be initiated. The writ petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE csl