Alternate statutory remedy bars writ challenge to municipal tax assessments; vires issue left open

Writ petitions challenging municipal tax assessment orders were held not maintainable where the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act provided a statutory appeal under Section 406. The Court treated the assessment regime as a self-contained scheme and held that objections to the levy and manner of assessment, including factual disputes, could be examined in the appellate forum. The inability to deposit disputed tax for filing an appeal did not justify bypassing the alternate remedy, absent exceptional grounds for writ interference. The challenge to the vires of Section 152D was not decided on merits and was left open for appropriate consideration. The petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether writ petitions challenging local body tax assessment orders were maintainable despite the statutory appeal under Section 406 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, and whether the petitioners could invoke writ jurisdiction to assail the assessment orders and keep open the vires challenge to Section 152D.

Analysis: The assessment orders were held to arise from a self-contained statutory scheme governing municipal taxation and local body tax. The Court noted that the petitions primarily challenged the assessment orders, while the grievance about inability to deposit disputed tax for an appeal could not justify bypassing the appellate remedy. The factual objections to the levy and the challenge to the manner of assessment were matters that could be examined on evidence in the statutory appeal. The Court also relied on the principle that where a statutory appeal is provided, writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be invoked to dispute assessment and demand orders, absent an exceptional case warranting interference. The challenge to the vires of Section 152D was not examined on merits and was left open.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable in view of the alternate statutory remedy, and the petitioners were directed to pursue the appeal under Section 406.

---