2009 (11) TMI 844

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act introducing section 23B, the petitioner filed applications before the second respondent for settlement of arrears. The second respondent passed orders on the application as evidenced by exhibits P5 and P5(a). The outstanding arrears with respect to both the years were permitted to be settled, after giving considerable reductions and the amount payable with respect to the year 1998-99 was settled at Rs. 3,29,551 (rupees three lakhs twenty nine thousand five hundred and fifty one only) and the amount payable for the year 1999-2000 was settled to Rs. 2,15,613 (rupees two lakhs fifteen thousand six hundred and thirteen only). In exhibits P5 and P5(a) orders the respondents had instructed the petitioner to pay the said amounts immediately. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lenging the recovery steps and seeking directions for permitting remittance of amounts under the amnesty settlements, in instalments. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondents it is stated that after receiving exhibits P5 and P5(a) intimations on December 5, 2008, the petitioner had never approached the respondents for any purpose. It is alleged that the petitioner kept silence about the orders for nearly 10 months. And knowing very well that as per the scheme under section 23B, the petitioner is bound to remit 25 per cent of the amount settled, within a period of 15 days, the petitioner failed to make payment of any such amount. Further it is stated that the petitioner had also failed to make payment of any amount within t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....visions of section 23B(4). If there was requirement of any clarification obtained with respect to exhibits P5 and P5(a) orders, the petitioner could have approached the authority concerned, with a written request, after effecting payment of 25 per cent within a period of 15 days. Apart from the mere allegation raised in the writ petition, that the petitioner had approached the authority on several occasions, nothing is produced to substantiate such a contention. No representation in this regard was seen submitted before the authority. Having failed in remitting the initial amount of 25 per cent or the subsequent monthly instalments, the request of the petitioner for remitting payment of the settled amount could not be accepted, at this bela....