M N BANDOPADHYAYA Vs. A P SANAL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the erstwhile Director of the National Institute of Technology, Calicut. On being served with a summons to appear before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Chathamangalam, on a complaint filed by the competent officer of the Panchayath under Section 210 of the Panchayath Raj Act,1994, he has approached this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the proceedings.

(2.) The specific allegation against the petitioner is that he had defaulted payment of building tax for the year 2011-2012. Though steps were taken as per the provisions of the Act and Rules, the amount could not be realised. This led to the initiation of prosecution proceedings.

(3.) Case of the 1st respondent as is evident from the prosecution records is that, on 6.12.2011, a notice was issued calling upon the petitioner to pay the arrears due amounting to Rs.32,996/-, being the amount due towards building tax in respect of certain buildings in the NIT premises, for the period 2011-2012, within a period of 15 days. On the failure of the defaulter to remit the arrears, a demand notice under Rule 14 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Taxation, Levy and Appeal) Rules, 1996 ("Rules 1996" for brevity) was issued on 7.3.2012. When it did not brook any result, the Secretary of the Panchayat proceeded to recover by distraint under his warrant by the sale of the movable properties of the defaulter. The warrant was issued on 30.3.2012, a copy of which is appended to the complaint. According to the complaint, when it was found that the distraint was impracticable, on the next day itself, ie, on 31.03.2012, Annexure-A complaint was filed before the Court.