JUDGMENT : Y.B. Bhatt, J. This group of Special Civil Applications was placed before this Full Bench under a direction of The Hon'ble the then Chief Justice on the basis of the order passed by the learned Single Judge (Coram : M.S. Shah, J.) dated 24th October, 1997. We have carefully examined the referring order as also the earlier orders passed by other Hon'ble Single Judges. We have also heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. As a result of hearing and discussion, both the learned counsel for the respective parties jointly state that these petitions are not required to be considered by this Full Bench, and can be placed before a Division Bench, in view of the following fact situation :- (1) These writ petitions have already been admitted by issuance of Rule, and the only question before this larger bench is as regards confirmation or otherwise of the ad-interim relief. (2) The Division Bench is equally competent to decide this question since all taxation matters including Municipal Taxation Matters should be heard and decided by a Division Bench, in view of Rule 1 and Rule 2 (10) (c) of The Gujarat High Court Rules, 1993. It appears that the learned Single Judge had overlooked this provision, Learned counsel for the respective parties had failed to point out this provision to the learned Single Judge, and the Registry has also overlooked this provision while placing the matters before The Hon'ble the then Chief Justice for obtaining administrative orders for placement before an appropriate bench. (3) The learned Single Judge has not, in any manner or in the least, cast any doubt upon two earlier Division Bench decisions of this Court namely 6 G.L.R. 228 and 1993 (2) G.L.H. 897 . (4) No question of law arises for consideration by this Full Bench inasmuch as there is no conflict between either of the aforesaid two Division Bench decisions, or that of any other Division Bench. 2. In view of the aforesaid fact situation, and the joint statement by the learned counsel, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises for consideration or for decision by this Full Bench. Even otherwise, we may observe in passing that as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pradip Chandra Parija & Ors. v. Pramod Chandra Patnaik & Ors. reported in 2002 (1) S.C.C. 1 . Even otherwise, we may observe in passing that as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pradip Chandra Parija & Ors. v. Pramod Chandra Patnaik & Ors. reported in 2002 (1) S.C.C. 1 . it is not open for a smaller Bench to doubt the validity of any decision of a Larger Bench and to refer the matter on this issue to a further Larger Bench. The reference if any, for this purpose can only be made to a co-ordinate bench, qua the bench which has delivered the judgment and laid down the law in respect of which doubt is created. However, as observed herein above, the learned Single Judge has not in any manner cast any doubt on the legality or validity of the observations or the conclusions drawn by the two Division Bench decisions referred to hereinabove. The learned Single Judge therefore, could have decided the question of ad-interim relief, which was the only question before him then. 3. In the premises aforesaid, these matters are directed to be placed before the appropriate Division Bench taking up Municipal Taxation matters. Decided Accordingly.