IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.8975 of 2009 Date of decision: 11th August, 2010 M/s Wireless TT. Info Services Limited … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Sandeep Chhabra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Goyal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Girish Agnihotri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arvind Seth, Advocate for respondent No.3. Mr. Sanjay S. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.4. Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for respondent No.5. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed with a prayer that instructions (Annexure P-5 to P-8) issued by the State Government be quashed, being illegal, arbitrary and against the settled provisions of law. Counsel for the State submits that after these instructions were issued, the State has enacted bye-laws and these instructions, by efflux of time, have lost their validity. Counsel for the petitioner states that the bye-laws enacted by the State have been challenged in a separate writ petition, therefore, the present petition to challenge the letters (Annexure P-5 to P-8), wherein instructions were issued, has been rendered infructuous. Civil Writ Petition No.8975 of 2009 It is stated that the Municipal Councils have demanded external development charges and other miscellaneous charges vide letter (Annexure P-9). This act of various Municipal Councils, whereby external development and other miscellaneous charges were demanded, can be assailed by filing an appeal. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that since the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy, the demand of external development and other miscellaneous charges, at the first instance, ought not to be determined in the present writ petition. In case the petitioner files an appeal within a period of 30 days from today, no objection qua limitation shall be raised and the appeal be decided within a period of six months from the date of its institution. Needless to say, the competence of Municipal Councils to demand external development and other miscellaneous charges will be an issue, on which the appellate authority shall apply its mind and decide the same in accordance with law. With the observations made above, present revision petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE August 11, 2010 rps 2