THANKAM v. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER

W.P.(C).35143/20092provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. In thealternative, the petitioner seeks a direction to the RevenueDivisional Officer, Thiruvananthapuram, to consider Ext.P13appeal and Ext.P14 stay petition and pass orders thereon withina time limit to be fixed by this Court and to stay theimplementation of Ext.P11 order and further proceedingspursuant to Ext.P15 notice. 2. The pleadings and the materials on record disclosethat the transfer of registry effected in favour of the petitionerpursuant to Ext.P1 sale deed executed by the fifth respondenthas been cancelled on the ground that the fifth respondent, whois the partner of a firm which is an assessee under the KeralaGeneral Sales Tax Act/Value Added Tax Act had transferred thelands after the liability to pay tax arose. Ext.P1 sale deed isdated 8.2.2005. The partnership firm of which the fifthrespondent is a partner was an assessee under the KeralaGeneral Sales Tax Act even before that date.

It was for the saidreason that the Tahsildar invoked Section 44 of the KeralaRevenue Recovery Act and cancelled the transfer of registryeffected in favour of the petitioner. Aggrieved by Ext.P11, thepetitioner has filed Ext.P13 appeal under Rule 18 of the Transferof Registry Rules, 1966 before the Revenue Divisional Officer, W.P.(C).35143/20093Thiruvananthapuram. Along with Ext.P13 appeal, he has filedExt.P14 stay petition seeking stay of operation of Ext.P11 andalso the proceedings initiated under the Kerala RevenueRecovery Act. Though under Rule 18 of the Transfer of RegistryRules, an appeal lies before the Revenue Divisional Officer, the Revenue Divisional Officer cannot stay recovery of the sales taxdue from the fifth respondent and other persons of the firm. Therefore, the petitioner cannot seek a stay of recovery of thesales tax due from the fifth respondent and other partners. However, as the petitioner has invoked the appellate remedyavailable to him under Rule 18 of the Transfer of RegistryRules, I am of the opinion that the Revenue Divisional Officershould take steps to dispose of the said appeal expeditiously.

Insuch circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with adirection to the first respondent to consider Ext.P13 appeal andpass orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within twomonths from the date on which the petitioner produces beforethe first respondent or the first respondent receives a certifiedcopy of this judgment.P.N.RAVINDRAN,Judgemrcs