1 S.B.CIVIL REVIEW PETITION NO.14/2008 IN S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 376/2007 Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vs. M/s Siddartha Marbles Ajmer & Ors. Pvt. Ltd. Date of Order :: 18.9.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Ravi Bhansali, for the petitioners. Mr. Sachin Acharya, for the respondents. ... To review the order dated 20.7.2007 passed by this Court in SBCivil Writ Petition No.376/2002 (M/s Siddartha Marmo Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Ajmer & Ors.) this application is preferred. By the order aforesaid while quashing the order impugned dated 21.12.2001 the assessing authority was directed to decide the matter afresh by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is stated by learned counsel for the review-petitioner that as a matter of fact during pendency of the writ petition the order of assessing authority was already affirmed by the appellate authority and as such, the order of the appellate authority is also required to be taken into consideration. It is also pointed out by learned counsel for the review- petitioner that in another set of writ petitions decided on the same date i.e. on 20.7.2007 wherein the orders passed by the appellate authority were also under challenge this Court held as follows: “For the reasons given above, the writ petitions No.3681/2001 and 361/2002 are dismissed as becoming infructuous. The writ petition No.6089/2003 giving challenge to the order passed by the appellate authority is allowed and the order impugned is quashed. The appellate authority shall decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner afresh on or before 3rd December, 2007. The bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner in 2 pursuant to the order passed by this Court in SBCWP No.3681/2001 shall remain in currency and in the event the appellate authority affirms the assessment, the amount will be payable to the respondent No.1 capable of being subsequently adjusted against the petitioner's liability. In the event the petitioner be not held liable for any dues, the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner shall be released.” (SBCivil Writ Petition No.3681/2001, M/s Quality Marbles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Ajmer & Ors.) Learned counsel for the writ - petitioner does not dispute the position stated above. It is the position admitted that the order passed by the appellate authorities in these matters was not brought into knowledge of the Court, and therefore, the Court examined validity of the order of assessing authority itself. Once this Court has examined validity of the order passed by assessing authority and held the same in violation of principle of natural justice as no opportunity was provided to the petitioner the order passed by the appellate authority, being an order subsequent to original order, also stands illegal. Thus, no reason is available to review the order dated 20.7.2007. Accordingly, this review petition is disposed of. (GOVIND MATHUR), J. Jgoyal '