^s^a-^^iS^ W9B^ ^i^r^ IN THE HIGH COURT OFCHHATTlSGARH AT BILASPUR Writ PetitionmNo. \^<^\ of 2010 Petitioner: . \ ^% ^w ^d" w '^w / • • <•' iy Resoondents: Simplex Infrastructures Limited (Formerly known as Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Limited), a company incorporated underthe Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at 27, Shakespeare Sarani, Kotkata - 700017, in the State of West Bengal and an office at C-12, NETAJI COMPLEX (2nd Floor), Mandir Chowk, Jharabhata, Bilaspur - 495001. District: Korba, in the stgite of Chhattisgarh represented by Mr Sandip Baran Das, Deputy General Manager and Power of Attomey. Versys (1) State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Commercial Taxes, D.K.S. Mantralaya Bhavan, Raipur(C.G.). (2) Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Vanijyik Kar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur(C.G.) ^' (3) Additional Commissioner of Commerciat Tax, Raipur (C.G.) ^ (4) Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Korba (C.G.) ,;' Before: Hon'ble the Chief Justice and his Companion Judaes of the Hon'bleHiah Court of Judicature, ChhattjsflarLaLBiLaspur Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of Jndja_for issuance of suitable directions. orders ^r_wnts Jndydmg^writs in the nature of mandamus, certiorari etc. _aie_|-liimhla no+itinn of- .,''e&i .^.(-g -w ^ f\r '^\ YKWSy HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS 3. 4. .P.(T) No.1434 of 2010 Simplex tnfrastructures Limitcd (Formerly known as Simplsx Concrete Piles (India) Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at 27, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700017, in the State of Wsst Benga! and an office at C-12, Netaji Co'mplex (2nd Floor), Mandir Chowk, Jharauhata, Bilaspur -495001, District; Korba, in the State of Chhattisgarh represented by Mr. Sandip Baran Das, Deputy General Manager and Power of Attorney. Versus State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Commercial Taxes, D.K.S. Maniralaya Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Vanijyik Kar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) Addittona! Commissioner of Commerciaf Tax, Raipur (C.G.) Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 QF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents on advance copy. ORALORPER (19.04.2010) SUNILKUMARSfNHA.J. Heard. The petitioner- Simplex Infrastructures Limited has filed this petition chailenging the order dated 1.2.2010 (Annexure-P/12) passed by the Commissioner, Vanijyik Kar Chhattisgaiti, Raipur. Mr. Arun Sao raises premilinary objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition arguing that the order passed by the Commissioner, Vanijyik '^ i& "?~s>> -/7^.' ''"^^.'t, W.P.(T)No. 1434 of2010 Kar Chhattisgarh, Raipur is an appealable order as the appeal against the said order lies before the Tribunal. Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, teamed counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, referring to the decision rendemed in Whlrloool CorooraSon -Vs- Reaistrar ofTrade Marks. Mumbai & offiers, (199S) 8 SCC oa. 1 argues that even in such situation, the High Court can entertain this writ petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India. 1 have heard the learned counset for frie parties at length and have also perused the records ofthe writ petition. In Whirlpool CorporaSon (supra), the Supreme Court held that under Article 226 of the Constifcition ofthe tndia, the High Court has a discreation to entertain or not to entertain the writ petition. But the High Court has imposed upon itself certain restrictions,one of which is that if an effective and efficacious remedy is available, the High Court would not normally exereise its writ jurisdiction. In the present case, admittedly there is an alternative remedy of filing an appeal against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner, Vanijyik Kar Chhattisgarh, Raipur and the said remedy is efficacious. It is not a case where the writ petition is filed for enforcement of any of the fundamental rights or where there has been violation of principles of natural justice or where the order orthe proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is under challenge. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, since an efficacious altemative statutory remedy of appeal is available with the petitioner, t am not inclined to admitthe petition forfurther hearing. Accordingly, W.P.O") No. 1434/2010 isdisposed of at this stage. However, the pefitioner would be at liberty to avail statutory rememdy of appeal against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner Vanijyik Kar Chhattisgarh, Raipur —— —— Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge ^-i-Hi