1. Appellants are the writ petitioners. They approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to quash the orders passed by the sixth respondent [Intelligence Officer (Investigation Branch), Thrissur] against them under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The further prayer sought by them was to quash the orders passed by the fourth respondent (Commissioner of Commercial Taxes) to the extent empowering the special team for disposal and to initiate penal and prosecution steps against the appellants. Yet another relief sought is to direct the respondents to properly adjudicate the penalty proceedings based on the materials on record and other evidence. There are other reliefs sought with which we are not to be detained.

2. By Ext.P1 order dated 05.7.2011, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes ordered as follows:

"It is brought to notice of the undersigned that an enquiry file relating to six dealers is pending with the Investigation Branch, Thrissur. It is also recommended that a special team may be constituted for the disposal of the pending file, and to pursue from the investigation, if necessary and to initiate penal and prosecution steps against the defrauders so that the heavy loss caused by them to the State exchequer may be made good forthwith.

In the circumstances, a special team is hereby constituted for the above purpose with the following Officers and headed by Sri.K.P.Sajeevan, Inspecting Asst. Commissioner (Int.), Kozhikode:

1. Sri. K.P. Sajeevan, Inspecting Asst. Commr. (Int), Kkd.

2. Sri. H.P. Haridasan, Int. Officer (I.B), Tcr.

3. Sri. T.V. Shaji, Int. officer, Sq. No.III, Thrissur.

4. Smt. P.V. Premi, Int. Inspector (IB), Thrissur.

5. Sri. Sreeraj K. Pillai, CTI (IB), Tcr.

6. Sri. C.R. Santhosh, CTI (I.B), Tcr.

7. Smt. Sini Sebastian, CTI (I.B), Tcr.

The team should complete the work within three months.

"Subsequently, by order dated 09.12.2011 produced as Ext. P1(a) in all the Writ Petitions, three Intelligence Inspectors, all working at Thrissur, were included in the team constituted for disposal of the pending files of the six live chicken dealers (three of whom who are the appellants before us).

3. The learned Single Judge has relegated the appellants to pursue the statutory remedies. It is being aggrieved by the same, the appellants are before us.

4. We heard Shri K. Sreekumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A. No.2266/12, Shri G. Shrikumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.No.39/13, Shri K. P. Mayankutty Mather, learned counselappearing for the appellant in W.A.No.40/13 and also Shri Sojan James, learned senior Government Pleader for Taxes.

5. The common contention which is raised by all the appellants is that the orders of penalty passed by the Intelligence Officer, Thrissur are without jurisdiction. The argument is that in so far as the Commissioner has constituted a team of seven officers and later on added to the said team with further three officers, it is only the team of officers who could have proceeded to impose penalty on the appellants. In this context, support is sought to be drawn from the Notification issued dated 31.3.2005 by the Government of Kerala apparently in exercise of the powers under Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Act providing for appointment of various officers with headquarters as specified in column (3) and functional jurisdiction in column (4) for performing the various functions under the Act. It is pointed out that apart from the Commissioner himself under column (4), namely indicating the functional jurisdiction, it is indicated in respect of the officers that it will be "all the functions assigned by the Commissioner". It is, therefore, contended that when Ext.P1 followed by Ext. P1(a) was issued by the Commissioner, it must be treated as vesting of the functions by the act of the Commissioner acting under the Notification issue