Judgment :- Heard learned Govt. Pleader also. 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm represented by its Managing Partner which is a small scale industrial unit engaged in the manufacture and sale of plastic coated kitchen stand. The unit was registered with the third respondent District Industries Centre, Ernakulam as an SSI unit bearing registration No. 09/03/11243/90 dt.12-9-1990. Government passed an order in exercise of the powers conferred under S.10 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 allowing exemption in respect of sales tax payable by new SSI units for a period of five years' from the date of commencement of production. Ext. P1 is the application submitted by the petitioner before the third respondent General Manager, District Industries Centre, Ernakulam for sales tax exemption. Ext. P2 is the letter from the third respondent to the second respondent informing the latter that the petitioner's unit is a registered SSI unit bearing No. 097 03/11243/90 and that they have submitted an application for sales tax exemption and the same is under process in the office of the third respondent. Ext. P2 further says that sales tax exemption order will be issued to the petitioner's unit subject to eligibility and approval of the same by the District Level Committee. Under Ext. P2 the third respondent has requested the second respondent "not to lake any coercive steps against the unit until you hear from me further". Ext. P2 is issued in October, 1994. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that pending decision on his exemption application by the third respondent, the first respondent has now issued Exts. P3, P3(a) and P3(b) series of demand notices asking the petitioner to pay the amounts mentioned therein, failing which it is threatened mat coercive action will be taken against him to recover the amount. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, since the exemption applications are pending before the third respondent and since no orders have been passed by the third respondent on the eligibility of the petitioner for exemption and further the third respondent himself has requested the second respondent to not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner "until you hear from me further", the revenue recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to Exts. P3, P3(a) and P3(b) cannot be legally sustained. 4. Learned Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the third respondent has no jurisdiction to issue Ext. P2. P3, P3(a) and P3(b) cannot be legally sustained. 4. Learned Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the third respondent has no jurisdiction to issue Ext. P2. I have considered this contention and find no merit in the same as according to me, it is not open for the Government to raise such an objection because Ext. P2 is issued by none other than an officer of the Government itself. The Government cannot take exception to an order passed by its own officer for the simple reason that the officer is presumed to have acted with the full authority and knowledge of the Government. Therefore, Ext. P2 is to be acted upon. However, the matter cannot be prolonged indefinitely. The question of exemption has to be decided with utmost dispatch so that amount, if any, due from the petitioner can be collected without undue delay. 5. Accordingly, I dispose of the original petition by directing the third respondent to pass final orders on the petitioner's application for exemption from sales tax within a stipulated time. Therefore, the third respondent is directed to pass orders on petitioner's application for exemption from sales tax within one month from today. Pending orders on petitioner's application for sales tax exemption, revenue recovery proceedings initiated against him pursuant to Exts. P3, P3(a) and P3(b) shall be kept in abeyance. Original Petition is disposed of as above.