ssp 1 WP 2025 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2025 OF 2010 Rajendra Pundalikrao Godshalwar .....Petitioner versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.S.P.Kadam i/by M/s.Kadam & Co., for the petitioner. Ms.Shobha Ajeet Kumar, for the respondents. CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATE: 14th FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation. It is not in dispute that the water connection has already been provided to the petitioner, as the petitioner has paid the amount to the Corporation as per the interim order passed by this Court. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Circular dated 08-07-1997 is applicable to the facts of the instant case and the new Circular dated 22-09-2009 cannot be made applicable. 2. This aspect has been denied by the Corporation by filing an affidavit-in-reply. In our view, the matter is in connection with the rateable value fixed by the Corporation, the appropriate remedy available to the petitioner would be to file tax appeal in accordance with law. ssp 2 WP 2025 of 2010 Since the water connection is reconnected, petitioner can avail alternate remedy of tax appeal or if the petitioner has any grievance in connection with the New Circular, he can file appropriate representation before the Corporation. It is however, clarified that if any amount is outstanding, the Corporation may take appropriate steps for recovery of the amount in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner may be given liberty to raise the issue involved in the present petition by way of filing tax appeal. Subject to the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner, writ petition is disposed of. ( A.A.SAYED, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )