IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3650 of 2005 OM PRAKASH JAISWAL, SON OF KRISHNA BIHARI JAISWAL, RESIDENT OF THAKURGANJ, P.S. THAKURGANJ, DISTRICT-KISHANGANJ…….PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. VICE CHAIRMAN-CUM-SPECIAL OFFICER, -CUM- EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NAGAR PANCHAYAT, THAKURGANJ, P.S. THAKURGANJ, DISTRICT- KISHANGANJ. …………………………………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the petitioner: Sanjeev Nikesh, Adv. For the Thakurganj Municipality: Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Adv. ------- 2/ 20-05-2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition questioning the validity of the demand notices, as contained in Annexures- 1, 1/A, 2 & 2/A, issued by respondent no.2. 3. Under the scheme of Bihar & Orissa Municipal Act, 1922 (In short “the Act”), if any person was aggrieved with the assessment of holding tax and publication of notice of assessment, he was/is entitled to seek review of the assessment and/or its correctness under section 116 of the Act. If some objections are raised, then matter is required to be decided by the prescribed authority under section 117 of the said Act. Admittedly, the petitioner has not availed of the alternative remedy available to him under the provisions 2 of the Act and has directly approached this Court. 4. After hearing the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner must approach the prescribed authority at the first instance disputing the correctness or otherwise of the demand notices issued by respondent no.2. Whereafter the matter is required to be examined and decided by the prescribed authority in accordance with law. 5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstance, the petitioner is hereby directed to appear before the respondent no.2 or the prescribed authority, by whatever name the post has been re-designated under the provisions of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007, within a period of four weeks from today. If the petitioner appears, with a certified copy of the present order and a detailed representation, before the prescribed authority within the time prescribed by this Court, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. If after hearing the parties, demand notice is required to be corrected, then the appropriate order should also be issued by the prescribed authority within the time prescribed by this Court. However, after hearing the parties and on consideration of the materials, if the prescribed authority 3 comes to a finding fixing liability of the petitioner towards holding tax, then the petitioner shall be obliged to deposit the same within a period of two months from the date of final order passed by the prescribed authority. 6. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not appear within the time prescribed by this Court with a certified copy of the present order and a representation before the prescribed authority or the respondent no.2, then it shall be construed that the present writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioner has finally been rejected by this Court. 7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. BTiwary/ (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)