Tarun Chatterjee, J. - (1.) All these batch of 10 writ petitions raised common questions of law and facts and, therefore, they were taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The writ petitioners who are owners of their respective premises and admittedly are liable to pay taxes to the Calcutta Municipal Corporation under the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') have challenged the orders passed by the Hearing Officer, determining the annual valuation of their respective premises and also prayed for setting aside the special notices issued by the Authorities under section 184(4) of the Act for revision of the annual valuation of their respective premises. The ground of revision indicated in such special notices issued under section 184(4) of the Act reads as follows: "New valuation of the portion in the premises on estimated yearly rental value less statutory allowances for repairs on apportionment of taxes with effect from 2/94-95 under section 178(3) read with section 180(1)(i) of C.M.C. Act, 1980."
(2.) In the said notices the writ petitioners were intimated that they were entitled to submit written objection against the determination of annual valuation under section 186 of the Act. From the said notice, it would also appear that in case the writ petitioners filed such written objection to the same, the same shall be considered and heard by the Hearing Officer on the dates mentioned in the said notices. It is not disputed that the petitioners have become owner of their respective premises by purchase. There is no dispute that the writ petitioners submitted their written objections against issuance of such special notices under section 184(4) of the Act. The Hearing Officer after considering the written objections filed by the writ petitioners passed orders fixing the annual valuation of the respective premises. Against the above orders of the Hearing Officer, determining the annual valuation of the flats in question, admittedly the petitioners have filed appeals before the Municipal Assessment Tribunal, Calcutta Municipal Corporation under section 189 of the Act which are still pending decision. The orders passed, by the Hearing Officer after considering the written objections as well a the jurisdiction of the Hearing Officer to revise, the annual valuation of the respective premises of the writ petitioners under section 184(4) of the Act are now under challenge in these batch of writ petitions.
(3.) Mr. Das Adhikari, appearing on behalf of the Calcutta Municipal Authorities raised a preliminary objection as to the entertain ability of the writ applications against the orders determining the annual valuation of the respective premises of the writ petitioners in view of the availability of an alternative remedy by way of an appeal under section 189 of the Act. He also submitted that in view of the admitted fact that in these cases the writ petitioners have already availed of such alternative remedy by filing appeals against the orders of the Hearing Officer which are still pending, the writ jurisdiction of this Court which is discretionary in nature cannot be invoked at this stage.;