Writ jurisdiction cannot compel declaration forms where statutory discretion and accounting requirements govern issuance.

Rule 85(4) made issuance of blank declaration forms dependent on the Sales Tax Officer's satisfaction that the dealer's demand was genuine and reasonable, and on proper accounting for earlier forms before any further supply. The High Court declined to use writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to compel issuance of the requested forms, holding that it would not substitute its view for the officer's assessment. The petitioner was required to pursue the statutory appellate remedy to contest the sanctioned quantity and explain prior forms. The attempt to challenge sub-rule (4) itself was not entertained because it had not been pleaded in the writ petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court should, in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226, compel the Sales Tax Officer to issue the requested blank declaration forms despite the officer's finding that only a smaller number was genuinely required and that earlier forms had not been properly accounted for.

Analysis: Rule 85(4) vested the issue of blank declaration forms in the Sales Tax Officer's satisfaction as to whether the dealer's demand was genuine and reasonable, and also required proper accounting for earlier forms before further forms could be issued. The power was therefore not one of unrestricted entitlement, and the Court would not substitute its own view for the officer's determination on the dealer's genuine need. The petitioner also had an effective statutory appellate remedy to challenge the quantum sanctioned and to establish proper accounting of earlier forms. The separate attempt to assail sub-rule (4) of rule 85 was not entertained because it had not been pleaded in the writ petition.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable for the relief sought, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the appellate remedy; the request to compel issuance of 300 forms failed.

---