IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6661 of 2003. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Jaipur VERSUS The State of Rajasthan & Others Date Of Order ::: 14/03/2008. Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain J. Mr. Sameer Jain, Counsel for the Petitioner Ms. Manju Dave, G.A., for the respondents BY THE COURT : Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 28.08.2003 (Annexure-5) passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 11 of the Rajasthan Land and Buildings Tax Act, 1964. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order passed by the Assessing Authority is without jurisdiction and further that the Assessing Authority has committed an illegality in treating the LPG Plant as part of building subject to the Land and Building Tax Act, 1964. He, therefore, contended that the impugned order passed by the Assessing Authority be set aside. Learned Government Advocate contended that apart from merits of the case, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy to challenge the impugned order available to the petitioner by way of an appeal. It is contended that the impugned order annexure-5 is appealable under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land and Building Tax Act, but without availing that remedy of an appeal, the petitioner has directly approached this Court by way of this writ petition, which is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in rejoinder, does not dispute that the impugned order annexure-5 passed by the Assessing Authority is appealable and an appeal lies under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land and Building Tax Act, but his submission is that the said remedy of statutory appeal is not efficacious, as the petitioner is required to deposit some amount before filing the appeal. He further submits that the petitioner has a right to file the writ petition directly without availing an alternative remedy available to the petitioner by way of statutory appeal. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned order annexure-5 passed by the Assessing Authority. There is no dispute in between both the parties that the impugned order annexure-5 is appealable and the appeal lies against this order before the Appellate Authority and without filing an appeal, the petitioner has directly approached this Court by way of this writ petition only to save himself with a condition provided under the statutes regarding deposit of some amount before or at the time of filing of an appeal. Normally, this Court does not entertain the writ petition directly against an order, which is appealable and the relevant statute provides for an appeal against that order. I do not find any extra-ordinary circumstances, in the facts and circumstances of the case, to entertain the present writ petition directly without filing an appeal before Appellate Authority. All points which have been taken by the petitioner in the present writ petition can very well be taken by the petitioner before the appellate Authority. In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. The petitioner will be at liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order. It is directed that no recovery, in pursuance of the impugned order annexure-5 shall be made from the petitioner for a period of one month from today. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. ashok/