J U D G M E N T

The petitioner was the owner of a bus bearing registration No. KL 03 T 5035. The challenge raised in this writ petition is against Ext.P2 Revenue Recovery notice issued to the petitioner, for realising an amount of Rs.6,60,863/- as the motor vehicle tax in respect of the said vehicle. As against Ext.P2, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 objection. The writ petition was submitted challenging Ext.P2 revenue recovery notice and also for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 representation submitted by the petitioner.

2. I have heard Sri. S.R.Sreejith, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Arun Ajay Shankar, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 6 and Sri. Binoy Vasudevan, the learned counsel appearing for the 7^th and 8^th respondents.

3. The specific contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the demand of motor vehicle tax in respect of the vehicle owned by the petitioner is not legally sustainable, in view of the fact that, the petitioner has already surrendered the vehicle as early as on 15.03.2023 to the

7^th and 8^th respondents, the