P.T.Davis vs The Deputy Commissioner ( Assmnt )
2021 Latest Caselaw 16698 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 16391 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

           P.T.DAVIS,
           AGED 57 YEARS
           PROPRIETOR, M/S.MARIA POULTRY FARM,
           KOMBODINJAMAKKAL, THRISSUR.

           BY ADVS.
           K.SRIKUMAR (SR.)
           K.MANOJ CHANDRAN



RESPONDENTS:

     1     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ( ASSMNT ),
           SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGST DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR-680001.

     2     THE JOINT COMMISSIONER,
           SGST DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR-680001.




           SMT. THUSHARA JAMES - SR.GP




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   11.08.2021,   THE   COURT    ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 16391 OF 2021
                                     2

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

impugning Ext.P4 on various grounds, but primarily

that it has been issued without affording him an

opportunity of being heard.

2. I have heard Shri.K.Srikumar, learned Senior

Counsel, instructed by Shri.K.Manoj Chandran,

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and

Smt.Thushara James, learned Senior Government

Pleader, appearing for the respondents.

3. Smt.Thushara James submitted that the

allegations of the petitioner are not true because,

prior to Ext.P4 being issued, he was served with a

proper notice, but he had not still appeared.

However, to a pointed question from this Court, she

conceded that said proceedings have been finalized

without affording an opportunity of being heard to

the petitioner.

4. When I consider the afore submissions, it is WP(C) NO. 16391 OF 2021

without doubt that even if a notice had been issued

to the petitioner, it would not suffice because the

opportunity of being afforded a personal hearing is

the fundamental tenet of the statutory scheme as also

the principles of natural justice.

5. I am, therefore, of the view that Ext.P4 will

require to be reconsidered by the competent

Authority, after affording an opportunity of being

heard to the petitioner.

Resultantly, I order this writ petition setting

aside Ext.P4; with a consequential direction to the

1st respondent to reconsider the matter, after

affording an opportunity of being heard to the

petitioner, culminating in an appropriate order

thereon, as expeditiously as is possible.

In order to enable compliance of the afore

directions without delay, I direct the petitioner to

mark appearance before the 1st respondent at 11.00

a.m. on 26.08.2021, on which day the said Authority

may either hear him or fix a convenient date for WP(C) NO. 16391 OF 2021

completing the said process.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/11.8 WP(C) NO. 16391 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16391/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17/03/2020.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22/03/2021.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08/04/2021.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30/06/2021.