DHANOOP T S Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is a dealer in plywoods. In this writ petition his grievance is regarding the refusal on the part of the first respondent in sealing delivery notes.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, when he approached the first respondent for sealing the delivery notes, the first respondent impounded the book and thereafter issued Ext.P6 notice for cancellation of his registration. In Ext.P6, the reasons stated are that the surety of the petitioner had already sold the property offered as security and that summons issued to the unregistered purchasing dealers of the petitioner were returned, on the ground that the address is incomplete.

(3.) A reading of Exts.P6 and P11 shows that there were sufficient grounds for issuing the same. Proceedings evidenced by Ext.P6 which led to the issuance of Ext.P11 are remaining incomplete. Therefore, at this stage I am not persuaded to direct the first respondent to issue delivery notes as sought for by the petitioner. On the other hand, what is required is that the first respondent shall finalise the proceedings initiated by Exts.P6 and P11 in the light of Ext.P8 and with notice to the petitioner. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. In the meantime, it would also be open to the petitioner to file his reply to Ext.P11 within two weeks from today.