2009-10 by filing necessary appeals and has obtained interim order of stay. The facts and figures will have to be considered in relation to the proceedings which are already under challenge by way of appeal before the appellate authority. This being the position, the matter has to be considered by the Departmental authorities at the first instance, before such an exercise is undertaken by this Court. In other words, the question is whether this Court should exercise the discretionary jurisdiction in the present case with reference to the plea as to absence of jurisdiction, in respect of the assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12. It is also to be noted in this context that, pendency of matters before this Court is alarmingly on increase and writ petitions are being filed, instead of availing the alternative remedy. This Court does not find it as a fit case to call for interference, adding one more to the existing files. More so, when the petitioner is having an effective alternative remedy and the question of disputed jurisdiction and such other issues can also be raised before the competent authority. Further, the petitioner has already moved the appellate authority and obtained interim orders in respect of the previous assessment years. In the said circumstances,
