CW 2498/99 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2498/99 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Versus State & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : 12/05/2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. S. Kasliwal, for petitioner Mr. Ravi Chirania, for respondents *** Instant petition is directed against the order of assessment [Ann.4] passed by the Assessing Authority under Rajasthan Land & Building Tax Act, 1964 in exercise of power u/s.11 of the Act. Against the order of assessment, application was filed by the petitioner u/s.22-A for rectification which was also rejected vide order Ann.5. The order of assessment, which is impugned in the instant petition, is indeed appealable order u/s.16 of the Act and this statutory alternative remedy has not been availed by the petitioner while filing instant petition. Main thrust of counsel for petitioner is that the Assessing Authority has committed an apparent error in holding the petitioner to be owner of the land in question being covered u/s.2(10) of CW 2498/99 [2] the Act and such finding recorded by the Assessing Authority is totally perverse and being a jurisdictional error can always be assailed under writ jurisdiction of this Court U/Art.226 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for petitioner has tried to persuade this court that the petitioner was never lessee of the property in question and Sec.2(10) proviso (2) will not apply in the case of present petitioner and in such circumstances, he cannot be considered to be the owner of the property. Counsel for respondents, while supporting the order of assessment, submits that the question raised by the petitioner is not a pure legal question, it is based on mix question of law and facts and which can be examined on it being raised by the Appellate Authority only if the appeal is preferred. In the opinion of this Court, submission made by counsel for petitioner is based on mix question of law and facts which cannot be appreciated by this court under its writ jurisdiction available U/Art.226 of the Constitution of India and can certainly be examined by the Appellate Authority on the basis CW 2498/99 [3] of material which either of party placed on record and that being statutory and alternative remedy of appeal available to the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court available U/Art.226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for petitioner further submits that after Act stands abolished w.e.f. 01/4/2003, Appellate Authority which was constituted by the respondents, is not functioning and whatever appeals are being filed are pending and no effective adjudication is taking place. Counsel further submits that the writ petition remained pending in this court and filing of appeal at this stage may cause prejudice to him since period of limitation has expired. In opinion of this court, that cannot be a ground by which statutory remedy of appeal in the ordinary course can be bye-passed, but at the same time, this court can always take note of the fact that if appeals are preferred, it should be expeditiously disposed of within reasonable time, but it should not be more than three months from CW 2498/99 [4] the date of its filing. As informed to this Court, ADM, North South, are designated as Appellate Authorities to decide such appeals under the Act, 1964. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of with the direction that if appeal u/s.16 of the Act is preferred by the petitioner within 45 days against the impugned order of assessment before the concerned Appellate Authority, the same may be treated to be within limitation and the authority may decide the appeal expeditiously, but in no case later than four months from its filing. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA2498CW99 12-5.doc