Aggrieved by that order, an appeal was preferred in which a Division Bench of the High Court passed the following order Having heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and perusing the records it is apparent that the Writ Petition was filed challenging the show cause numberice issued by the Ranchi Municipal Corporation whereas in the Act itself remedy was provided.
Having heard and perusing the order impugned we are of the opinion that since remedy was available to the Appellant against the show cause numberice, the Writ Petition itself was number maintainable.
However, on merits the Writ Petition was dismissed against which this L.P.A. has been filed.
In this view of the matter, this L.P.A. is also number maintainable.
We record the statement of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and dismiss the Special Leave Petition as withdrawn.
The Appellant has challenged the imposition of enhancement of tax on the Appellant by way of a Writ Petition which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge upholding the said imposition.
P. Misra, J. Leave granted.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
The Appellant has challenged the order passed by the High Court dated 13th January, 1999 whereby the review application was dismissed holding that the order passed by the High Court, which was sought to be reviewed, merged with the order passed by the Court on 3rd November, 1997 and hence the review was number maintainable.
Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant preferred an S.L.P. to this Court which was disposed of by this Court on 3rd November, 1997, which reads thus Mr. Dipankar Gupta, learned senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the observations made by the Division Bench in its order dated 20.08.1997 to the effect that the Writ Petition had been filed challenging the show cause numberice issued by the Ranchi Municipal Corporation are factually number companyrect and, therefore, the Petitioner would approach the High Court for a review petition.
