Tuesday vs State
2021 Latest Caselaw 10725 Ker

WP(C) 7279/2021                                 1/3

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                             Present:
                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

                     Tuesday,the 30th day of March 2021/9th Chaithra, 1943
                                    WP(C) No.7279/2021(H)
PETITIONER

           For information purpose only
       SINI PRAMODKUMAR,AGED 48 YEARS,W/O.PRAMODKUMAR, EDATHARA
       VEEDU, THORAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

RESPONDENTS
       1.STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
       REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695
       001.

       2.DISTRICT COLLECTOR,COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE,
       THRISSUR - 680 003.

       3.REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,CIVIL STATION ANNEXE,
       IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 125.

       4.TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR
       DISTRICT - 680 125.

       5.VILLAGE OFFICER,THORAVU VILLAGE OFFICE,
       PUTHUKKAD - 680 301.



         Writ Petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit
filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be pleased to stay further proceedings pursuant to
Exhibit P3, pending disposal of the Writ Petition .


         This petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed
in support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of M/S LINDONS C.DAVIS,
E.U.DHANYA, RAJITH DAVIS, Advocates for the petitioner and of the GOVERNMENT
PLEADER for the respondents(B/o), the court passed the following
                              A.M.BADAR, J
            ===============================================
                         WP(C) No. 7279 of 2021
             ==============================================
                DATED THIS THE 30th day of March, 2021

                                ORDER

For information purpose only Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

He submits that

the assessing authority has no power to re-open or review the

assessment order and to substitute it with a fresh one on a different

basis. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on judgment in the

matter of Aswirathul Musthaqeem Sangham, Pengattu Kundu Vs. State

of Kerala and Another reported in 2019 (1) KHC 312. With this, it is

argued that the initial assessment order at Ext.P1, which is the subject

matter of challenge in appeal at Ext.P2 came to be again modified by

the concerned respondent and it is substituted with the fresh order at

Ext.P3.

Issue notice before admission to the respondents returnable after

ten weeks. The learned Government Pleader takes notice for

respondents. In the meanwhile, interim relief as prayed.

sd/-

                                                    A.M.BADAR
Nsd                                                   JUDGE




                                    /true copy/    Sd/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
 KLHC010193082021                   3/3

EXHIBIT P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE AS PER FILE NO.G2/17563/17 DATED 13/10/2020 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P1(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P1.

EXHIBIT P2 - A COPY OF APPEAL FILED ON 9/12/2020 BY THE PETITIONER

For information purpose only PENDING BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA.

EXHIBIT P2(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P2.

EXHIBIT P3 - A COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G2-17563/2017 DATED 05/02/2021 OF THE TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM.

EXHIBIT P3(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P3.