The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “ (A) To issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to Exhibit P10 order passed by the 1st respondent and quash Exhibit P10 to the extent of fixing liablity to pay balance tax by the petitioner.
(B) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 3rd respondent, Regional Transport Officer, Muvattupuzha to accept the Exhibit P5 demand draft towards the tax amount for the year 2009-2011 for vehicle bearing registration No.KL-07-D7627 for the period 2009- 2011 in the category Omnibus for Private use and issue a receipt forthwith and allow the petitioner to renew the certificate of registration of the vehicle with effect from 16.03.2013, so as to enable the petitioner to ply the vehicle and allow the petitioner to remit the tax of the vehicle in the category Omnibus for private use.
(C) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding 3rd respondent to change the ownership of the vehicle in the name of the W.P.(C) No.3238 of 2013 2 petitioner taking into consideration the sale letter in the name of the petitioner and to issue a new R.C. Book in the name of the petitioner in the category Omnibus for private use.
(D) Issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
2. The tax liability for the period from 11.06.1998 to 30.06.2008 in respect of the vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-07-D7627 belonging to the petitioner came to be finalised by passing Ext.P10 order dated 27.06.2012 by the 1st respondent. Non payment of the due amount led to proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this writ petition.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, referring to the facts and figures and as to the nature and extent of liability involved, seeking to sustain the impugned proceedings.
4. Today, when the matter is taken up for further consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not intend to press the W.P.(C) No.3238 of 2013 3 challenge any further and that he might be permitted to clear the entire outstanding liability by way of two equal monthly instalments.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to liquidate the entire liability as on date, by way of two equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 30th of this month, followed by the next one on or before 30th of December 2014. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any default is committed with regard to the satisfaction of the instalments on time as aforesaid, it will be open for the respondent Bank to proceed with further steps in accordance with law, from the stage where it stand now.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE NS