Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner who is a law graduate, has been actively practicing, as a lawyer, both at Puducherry, as well as at Cuddalore. He has his permanent residence at Cuddalore and he also resides, temporarily, at Puducherry, due to his professional work. While so, he had purchased a Mahindra and Mahindra Sedan Car in the year, 2010, at Puducherry, bearing Registration No.PY-01-BD-4446. He has paid the Life Time Road Tax, at the time of the Registration of the Vehicle, vide Receipt No.A384050, dated 2.8.2010. 3. It has been further stated that the respondent is insisting on the petitioner paying the Road Tax, once again, in respect of the State of Tamilnadu, even though the petitioner had paid the Life Time Road Tax, during the registration of the vehicle in question, at Puducherry. The demand made by the respondent for the payment of Road Tax, in respect of the State of Tamilnadu, along with the penalty, is arbitrary and illegal. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader (Writs) appearing on behalf of the respondents, had submitted that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed, in limine, as it is premature in nature. He had also submitted that no writ petition can be filed praying for a general relief, as in the present writ petition. It had also been submitted that the petitioner has not shown, by way of records, that a formal demand had been made, asking him to pay the Life Time Road Tax, in respect of the vehicle in question. While so, it is not proper for the petitioner to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, by filing the present writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the respondent not to insist on the payment of additional Road Tax, for the use of his vehicle, bearing Registration No.PY-01-BD-4446, in the State of Tamilnadu. As such, it is clear that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is devoid of merits and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. 5. As such, it is clear that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is devoid of merits and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned and on a perusal of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition filed by the petitioner is devoid of merits. It is a well settled position of law that an omnibus prayer, as in the present writ petition, cannot be made. Further, the petitioner has not been in apposition to show that the Life Time Road Tax had been levied or demanded by the authorities concerned, in respect of the vehicle belonging to the petitioner. As such it is clear that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is premature in nature and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.