Disposed

Shaji.M.N v. Commissioner of Excise

Kerala HC12 Dec 2017WP(C)/38340/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a liqueur shop licensee, sought directions from the Excise Commissioner to consider his representation regarding tax charges within one month. The Court dispensed notice to other respondents and directed the Deputy Commissioner (2nd Respondent) to pass appropriate orders.

What did the court decide?

Directed 2nd respondent to consider petitioners representation and pass appropriate orders within one month.

Shaji.M.N Vs Commissioner of Excise — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/21ST AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 38340 of 2017 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SHAJI.M.N., AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, MUKALEL HOUSE, EDAMATTOM (P.O), PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, EXCISE HEAD QUARTERS, NANDAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033.

¶11

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 002.

¶12

3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE PONKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN -686 506.

¶13

4. K.M. MANU, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.K.K.MADHAVAN, KUNNATHUPULINTHANATHU (H), NEDUMALA, KOOVAPPALLY P.O, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN:686 518.

¶14

5. K.M. SHIJU, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.P.K.MANIYAN, KIZHAKKETHIL (H), VIZHIKKATHODU P.O, KOOVAPPALLY VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN: 686 518.

¶15

WP(C).No. 38340 of 2017 (N)

¶16

6. MINI., AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.LATE JALAJA KUMAR, CHENKALLUNKAL (H), CHENAPPADI P.O., ERUMELY SOUTH VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN: 686 518.

¶17

BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.S. SHEEJA

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

sdr/-

¶20

WP(C).No. 38340 of 2017 (N)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TREE TAX CHALAN DATED 25.09.2017.

¶24

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10.11.2017

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

sdr/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.

¶31

W.P.(C).No.38340 of 2017

¶32

Dated this the 12^th day of December, 2017

¶33

J U D G M E N T

¶34

The petitioner, who is the licensee of toddy shops in Group No.V of Kanjirappally Excise Range in Kottayam District, has approached this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 representation dated 10.11.2017, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3.

¶36

Considering the nature of relief sought for, service of notice on respondents 4 to 6 is dispensed with.

¶37

The learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that the 2^nd respondent shall consider Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, with notice to the petitioner and also to respondents 4 to 6.

¶38

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 representation submitted by the petitioner, with notice to the petitioner and also to respondents 4 to 6, as expeditiously as

¶39

W.P.(C).No.38340 of 2017

¶40

¶41

possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶42

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in Ext.P2 and it is for the 2^nd respondent to take appropriate decision, strictly in accordance with law.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶45

Shaji.M.N v. Commissioner of Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaji.M.N v. Commissioner of Excise

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jose Varghese Vs the Regional Service Co-Operative Bank, Kaduthuruthy Branch

Pradeep.S Vs the Special Sale Officer

Isha Athussunna Al-Islamia Juma Masjid Vs the State of Kerala

Punja Special Officer, Punja'S Special Office, Alappuzha Vs Sreejith T.K

T.P. Surendran Vs Mulakulam Service Co-Operative Bank

Sujatha Mathummal Vs the Kannur District Co-Operative Bank