JUDGMENT A. R. TIWARI, J. - This is a petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner seeks quashment of sale proceedings, orders of assessment and order of penalty (annexure R/6). 3. The facts are jejune. The respondents assessed the firm "Prakash Trading Company". The respondents also initiated action against the petitioner as the partner of the defaulting firm as noted above. The respondents passed the order of assessment against the firm. They also seized the goods linking the same as belonging to the assessee-firm and imposed the penalty on the ground that the goods of the assessee-firm were found unaccounted for, with the petitioner. The petitioner, thus impugns the undernoted orders - (a) The order of assessment passed against the firm. (b) The order of seizure of goods and the order of penalty passed against the petitioner (annexure R/6). 4. By order dated September 22, 1993, the goods were treated to be perishable and were directed to be sold by the petitioner under the supervision of sales tax authority and allowed the sale proceeds to be retained by the Sales Tax Department subject to the disposal of the petition. 5. The goods have been sold in conformity with the directions and the sale proceeds are lying with the Sales Tax Department. 6. The respondents have filed the reply in opposition. 7. I have heard both sides. 8. The counsel for the petitioner very frankly submitted as under : (a) The order of assessment passed against the firm has since been quashed by the superior authority and the matter has been remitted back to the lower authority for fresh assessment in conformity with law. The application of the petitioner (marked annexure P/4 with the interlocutory application) seeking refund of the amount recovered in pursuance of the order of assessment, is pending before the Commissioner. (b) The order of penalty (annexure R/6) is challengeable under the provisions of the Act but the period of limitation has since been expired. 9. The Government Advocate has opposed the tenability of the petition on the ground of existence of alternative remedy and forum. 10. (b) The order of penalty (annexure R/6) is challengeable under the provisions of the Act but the period of limitation has since been expired. 9. The Government Advocate has opposed the tenability of the petition on the ground of existence of alternative remedy and forum. 10. In AIR 1994 SC 754 (State of U.P. v. Labh Chand), it is laid down as under : "When a statutory forum or Tribunal is specially created by a statute for redressal of specified grievances of persons on certain matters, the High Court should not normally permit such persons to ventilate their specified grievances before it by entertaining petitions under article 226 of the Constitution is a legal position which is too well-settled..........." 11. Faced with the preliminary objection, the counsel for the petitioner then prayed as under : (a) The Commissioner may be directed to consider and decide annexure P/4 in accordance with law within a reasonable period. (b) The period of limitation be extended to enable the petitioner to resort to alternative remedy to assail the order of penalty (annexure R/6). 12. Shri Zelawat does not seriously oppose the limited prayer made by the petitioner in the face of the preliminary objection. 13. In the circumstances, I find it fit to permit the preliminary objection to prevail and dispose of this petition with the directions as under : (i) The Commissioner shall consider and decide the application (annexure 4) within a period of three months from today in accordance with law and intimate the result to the petitioner. (ii) The petitioner is granted liberty to resort to an alternative remedy against the order (annexure R/6) within a period of one month from today. If the remedy is resorted to within this specified time, it shall not be contested and shall not fail on the ground of limitation and to that extent, the delay, as agreed to, shall be treated as condoned and the proceedings shall be decided on merits in accordance with law. (iii) The authority hearing such proceedings shall also pass appropriate order with regard to the sale proceeds as noted above in conformity with law. 14. With the aforesaid directions, this petition stands finally disposed of with no orders as to costs. Petition disposed of accordingly.