The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
“i) to call for the records relating to Exts.P1 to P10 and to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Exts.P9 and P10;
ii) to issue any writ order or direction commanding the Respondents to refund the amount of Rs.46920/-remitted by the petitioner on the basis of the order passed by the 2nd respondent.
iii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction also may be granted to meet out justice under the circumstances of the above case.”
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that against the final assessment, the petitioner has already moved the second respondent/appellate authority by way of appeal raising many a ground. But without any regard to the specific grounds raised by the petitioner, the proceedings were finalised by passing Ext. P9, which in turn is under challenge in this writ W.P.(C)No.30822 OF 2014 2 petition.
3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel as well.
4. On going through the pleadings and proceedings, it is seen that as on the date of passing Ext.P9 order, i.e. 15.10.2014, the said authority was having no jurisdiction to have passed the said order. This is for the reason that, competency of the second respondent to have acted as the appellate authority was the subject matter of consideration before this Court in W.P.(C) 24714 of 2012, wherein it was held that the appellate authority to be notified by the State Government, in terms of the relevant provisions of law, shall be a person, who is not connected with the affairs of the Board/licencee. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the State Government has already notified an independent authority to function as the appellate authority as per the Gazette Notification dated 15.10.2014.
5. This being the position, this Court finds that Ext.P9 order is not correct or sustainable and that the matter requires to be reconsidered. Accordingly, Ext.P9 is set aside and the second respondent/Deputy Chief Engineer is directed to forward the W.P.(C)No.30822 OF 2014 3 appeal preferred by the petitioner to the competent authority forthwith, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The competent authority, on receipt of the appeal, shall consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within two months thereafter. Coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till such time.
The writ petition is disposed of. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the competent authority for further steps.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE lk