ORDER This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against an assessment made by an Additional Sales Tax Officer, Nagpur, under Section 11 of the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, for the six quarters ending on 31st March, 1949. We may mention that the applicant has also challenged in his application the assessment mad by the Sales Tax Officer Nagpur, for the quarter ending the 30th September, 1947. He has preferred an appeal with respect to this assessment and that appeal is now pending before the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Nagpur. 2. We do not propose to say anything with respect to this latter matter because the applicant has his remedy under the Sales Tax Act, and has actually pursued it. As regards the assessment for the six quarters ending on 31st March, 1949, the contention of the learned Additional Government Pleader is that we have no power to interfere because the special Act provides a special procedure by way of an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner and a revision before the Commissioner and the Board of Revenue. In our opinion, this Court would be justified in entertaining an application under Article 226 even with respect to such an assessment if it found that that assessment was made without jurisdiction. In the present case, the assessment has been made by an Additional Sales Tax Officer, Nagpur, and the question is whether he had jurisdiction to make it. 3. Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Sales Tax Act provides for the appointment by the Government of persons under any "prescribed designation" to assist the Commissioner of Sales Tax. Sub-section (2) of that section provides that the Government may specify areas within which the person so appointed may exercise the jurisdiction. The word "prescribed" has been defined in Section 2(e) of the Act to mean prescribed by rules made under the Act. Rule 3 framed under the Act has set out only the following classes of authorities :- (a) Headquarters Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, hereinafter referred to as Headquarters Assistant Commissioner; (b) Regional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, hereinafter referred to as Assistant Commissioner; (c) Sales Tax Officers; (d) Assistant Sales Tax Officers; and (e) Inspectors of Sales Tax. The Additional Sales Tax Officer is not within this list. 4. The Additional Sales Tax Officer is not within this list. 4. The learned Additional Government Pleader, however, argues that the Additional Sales Tax Officer does not belong to a different category, that he is really only a Sales Tax Officer and that the word "additional" is merely descriptive. In our opinion, this is not the correct position. The object in appointing an Additional Sales Tax Officer (as in providing for the appointment of an Assistant Sales Tax Officer) was to afford assistance to the Sales Tax Officer. If it were intended that any one who was to assist the Sales Tax Officer could be appointed without making a special provision under the rules then there was no need for providing for the appointment of an Assistant Sales Tax Officer, but the rule expressly provides for the appointment of an Assistant Sales Tax Officer. The absence of a similar provision with regard to an Additional Sales Tax Officer must therefore be regarded as significant. Accordingly, we infer that it was not thought necessary to create Additional Sales Tax Officers and repeal the contention raised by the Additional Government Pleader. 5. We would also point out that under Rule 53 of the rules framed under the Sales Tax Act, the State Government provides for appeals against the assessments made by two classes of persons only, viz., a Sales Tax Officer and an Assistant Sales Tax Officer, but not against the assessments of an Additional Sales Tax Officer. Clearly, therefore, the applicant had no right to prefer an appeal to any authority under the Sales Tax Act. That being the position, two courses were open to him - to institute a civil suit or to come to this Court under Article 226. He has come to this Court and we think that it will be more convenient and be in the interest of justice if we were to exercise our jurisdiction to interfere in a case of this type. We are clear that the assessment was made by the Additional Sales Tax Officer without any jurisdiction. We therefore quash it. Nothing that we have said should be taken to mean that the proper authority cannot proceed with the assessment. 6. For the reasons we allow the application with costs. Counsel's fee Rs. 50, if certified. Application allowed.