- (1.) THE Court: I have heard the matter for quite some time. In the course of hearing, mr. Basu, senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners want to go to the tribunal, if permissible in law, questioning the orders of the hearing officer dated February 19, 2004 given in the assessment proceedings initiated for determining annual values of the premises in question effective from third quarter 1996-97 and third quarter 2002-03. Mr. Das Adhikary, senior counsel for the corporation, submits that no permission from this court is necessary for the petitioners to go to the tribunal, if permissible in law, for questioning the orders of the hearing officer made in February 2004.
(2.) IN view of the above noted submission made by Mr. Basu, I think it is not necessary for me to deliver a judgment in the case dealing with its merits. Counsel for the petitioners, as a matter of fact, does not want me to give a judgment. He rather invites me to permit the petitioners to go to the tribunal, if permissible in law. I think permission as prayed for should be granted. It is to be noted that against the orders of the hearing officer statutory remedy of the petitioners was appeals under s. 189 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The appeals were to be filed within the time prescribed by the statute. The petitioners did not prefer appeals, instead approached the writ court straight. Be that as it may, I think there is no reason to say that the petitioners should not be permitted to approach the tribunal, even if they are entitled to do that today.
(3.) FOR these reasons, I dispose of the writ petition by saying that if permissible in law even today, then nothing in this order shall prevent the petitioners from preferring appeals to the tribunal in terms of the provisions in s. 189 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 for questioning the two orders of the hearing officer both dated February 19, 2004 given in the abovementioned two assessment proceedings. There shall be no order for costs.;