JUDGMENT Kanakaraj, J. - The writ petition is for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated March 1, 1983 issued under sections 27 and 36 of the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act, 1864, in respect of certain amounts said to be due as arrears of sales tax. The short facts which are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows : The assessment relates to the year 1973-74 and the assessment order was originally made on August 11, 1975 against one assessee by name K. Chakrapani. The said Chakrapani passed away on December 27, 1978. Proceedings under section 16 were taken and the same culminated in the order dated May 5, 1979. These proceedings seem to have taken against the dead person. Therefore, on appeal, the appellate authority by order dated October 15, 1980 set aside the revised assessment. Fresh notice was issued on July 13, 1981 to the petitioner as legal representatives of the assessee K. Chakrapani. Fresh order was issued on August 31, 1981. That was questioned before the appellate authority without any success. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Coimbatore Branch and the same is pending. However he did not get any order of stay and that has resulted the present revenue recovery proceedings dated March 1, 1983 impugned in this writ petition. The argument of Mr. R. Venkataraman learned counsel for the petitioner is that when the liability is questioned by the petitioner and the same is pending disposal by the Tribunal, it is not open to the respondent to initiate revenue recovery proceedings. In support of his argument learned counsel relied on Estee Hubs & Drives (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (C.T.) [1988] 70 STC 345. A Division Bench of this Court has held that it was not proper for the department to initiate revenue recovery proceedings in respect of the liability which was subject-matter of the revision petition, before the Deputy Commissioner under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The present case is identical, except the matter is pending in appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Learned Government Advocate for the Revenue is unable to meet the argument of the petitioner based on the said Division Bench judgment. I am bound by the ratio of the judgment and consequently applying the same the impugned proceedings are quashed. The present case is identical, except the matter is pending in appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Learned Government Advocate for the Revenue is unable to meet the argument of the petitioner based on the said Division Bench judgment. I am bound by the ratio of the judgment and consequently applying the same the impugned proceedings are quashed. The writ petition is allowed. There will be no order as to costs. Writ petition allowed.