JUDGMENT :- 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the respondent had passed the impugned order, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. She had also stated that a single order had been passed, for four different assessment years, even though it is not permissible in law. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had not refuted the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 4. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 14.9.2010, is set aside. However, it is made clear that the respondent may issue separate notices to the petitioner, for the four different assessment years and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, on the objections raised by the petitioner and taking into consideration the relevant records submitted by the petitioner, at the time of the hearing. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.