THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.17367 of 2010 Dated:10.08.2010 Between: Suru Rama Mohan Rao. …Petitioner and Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Represented by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.17367 of 2010 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioner is a resident of premises bearing door No.50-94-23, Shantipuram, Visakhapatnam. Aggrieved by the alleged coercive steps being initiated by the respondent for collecting arrears of tax, the petitioner is before this Court seeking a preventive order. We have heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC), the sole respondent herein. Indisputably, the petitioner filed a writ petition, being W.P.No.21450 of 2009. The same was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court on 18.03.2010. The order passed reads under. This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the Demand Notice dated 14-10-2008 in Bill No.3885, issued by the respondent, demanding Rs.14,878/- towards House tax in respect of his house bearing Door No.50-94-23, Shanthipuram, Visakhapatnam. When the matter is taken up for hearing and after arguing for quite some time, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the impugned demand notice dated 14-10-2008, a statutory appeal lies with the authorities. Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed, giving liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal before the authorities concerned. No order as to costs. Adverting to the above order, in paragraph 9 of the affidavit accompanying the writ petition, the petitioner on oath states as follows. I submit that, questioning the action of enhancement of property tax, I made several representations followed by reminders as stated supra. As no action was taken, I was compelled to approach the Hon’ble Court by filing W.P.No.21450 of 2009. This Hon’ble Court by an order dated 27.04.2010 directed me to approach the Appellate Authority by way of an Appeal. The same was complied with, but, till date no action is taken. A perusal of the order passed by the Division Bench and the affidavit averments would leave no doubt that the petitioner indeed availed the remedy of appeal. It is, however, vehemently urged that no such appeal is maintainable under Section 282 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (the Act) in view of subsection (2) thereof. We, however, are not able to countenance the submission. Now that a demand notice is issued, it is also an appealable order under Section 282(1) of the Act. As the petitioner, admittedly, has availed such a remedy, he may pursue the same. Even if such remedy has not been availed, we leave it open to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy under the Act as applicable to GVMC. We express no opinion on the merits of the case. The Writ Petition, with the above observations, stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) ______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) 10.08.2010 vs