Judgment :- SWAMIKKANNU, J. These are petitions filed for issue of writs of certiorari calling for the records of the third respondent and quashing the notices dated 3rd February, 1983, issued to the petitioners herein, which are pre-revision notices. It is certainly open to the petitioners to appear before the concerned authorities and raise all objections before them. Mr. R. Lokapriya, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), submits on behalf of the respondents that the records seized from the petitioners were verified with the regular accounts and it was found that the transactions were accounted for and that there was no case for any proposal and that orders were obtained for the return of the records to the dealers on 23rd August, 1988. A reference to the said effect was also issued to the dealers which was received by them on 23rd September, 1988. The dealers have not turned up to receive the records so far. These facts are found in the letter No. A.P. 179/83-84 dated 15th December, 1988, written by the Assistant Commissioner (C.T.), Enforcement I, Madras-6, to the Deputy Commissioner (C.T.), Legal, Madras-5. 2. In W.M.P. Nos. 713 to 716 of 1984, by order dated 17th March, 1987, this Court observed that it would be open to the petitioners to resort to other appropriate legal remedies and that if the petitioners request, the authorities are to furnish copies of any records seized at the expense of the petitioners. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that section 41 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, contemplates that the seized records shall not be retained by any officer for more than thirty days at a time, except with the permission of the next higher authority and, in the instant case, the records seized were kept for more than 30 days without such sanction and hence they must be returned. Learned counsel relied on the decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Oriental Rubber Works 1984 (38) CTR 154, 1984 (2) TLR 145, 1984 AIR(SC) 230, 1983 (3) CompLJ 381, 1984 ECR 1233, 1984 (145) ITR 477, 1983 (2) Scale 682 , 1984 (1) SCC 700 , 1984 (1) SCR 817 , 1984 UJ 214 , 1984 TaxLR 145, 1983 (15) TAXMAN 51, 1984 (38) CTR(SC) 154 (SC) wherein, it was held that the retention of the seized accounts and other documents beyond 60 days without communicating the order of the next higher authorities to the petitioner, on which fact there was no dispute, rendered the retention illegal. However, there is no provision in the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, requiring the authorities, retaining the documents for more than 30 days to communicate to the petitioner, the permission obtained by them from the next higher authorities to keep the records for a further period. When there is no such provision, it cannot be successfully contended that there was no communication by the authorities to the petitioners herein, intimating that they had obtained permission of the next higher authorities for retention of the documents for a further period. In the instant case, since the seized records have been directed to be returned to the petitioners herein, this Court finds that nothing survives in these writ petitions. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. No costs.