IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12891 of 2009 M/S MAGADH ADVERTISING BUREAU, S.P. Verma Road, Police Station- Gandhi Maidan, District-Patna through its Chief Executive Officer and signatory Mr. Parimal. ...............Petitioner. Versus 1. PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION 2. The Additional Municipal Commissioner, Revenue, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna. .............Respondents. ----------- 2/ 06.10.2009 Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has chosen not to challenge the demand of money/royalty on advertisement by the Patna Municipal Corporation through notice contained in Annexure-1 on various grounds including double taxation only because the notice is defective as it uses the word “advertisement royalty/money” instead of “advertisement tax” as mentioned in Section 147 of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007. Only because the word “tax” has not been mentioned in the notice and instead “advertisement royalty/money” is mentioned therein along with all necessary details including a warning that if the money is not deposited within the specified time then action shall be taken under Section 152 of 2 the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 the petitioner cannot avoid his liability to pay the demand. In any case on that count alone it will not be proper to exercise writ jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances, learned Counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of his writ petition with liberty that the petitioner will file a fresh writ petition challenging the demand raising all the points available to the petitioner. The prayer is allowed and the writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid. kksinha/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)