JUDGMENT : BISWANATH SOMADDER, J. 1. Let a copy of the receipt indicating payment of costs in terms of our order dated 14th November, 2018, be taken on record. 2. By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day’s list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay. 3. The instant appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 4th June, 2018, passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P. 24280 (W) of 2015 (Saurendra Mohan Chandra Ors. vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.). 4. By the impugned judgment and order, the writ petition was disposed of as follows: - “An order of assessment is under challenge in the present writ proceeding. Since the impugned order is appealable and the petitioner has a statutory alternative efficacious remedy, I am not minded to interfere therewith by way of a writ petition. W.P. No. 24280 (W) of 2015 is disposed of accordingly.” 5. The present appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioners. 6. According to the learned advocate representing the appellants/writ petitioners, the order of assessment was neither communicated nor does it contain any reason. 7. During the course of hearing of the appeal, the records were called for and the same have been produced by the learned advocate representing Kolkata Municipal Corporation. Photocopies of the relevant pages of the Inspection Book of Kolkata Municipal Corporation - wherein the reasons have been provided by the concerned authority while passing the order of assessment - have been produced before us. The learned advocate for Kolkata Municipal Corporation has also drawn our attention to the initial of Saurendra Mohan Chandra, being the appellant no. 1/writ petitioner. 8. Upon perusing the records, we do not agree with the submissions made by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants/writ petitioners that there are no reasons provided in the order of assessment. The reasons for determination of assessment value may be cryptic and not elaborate but certainly cannot be said to be no reasons. 9. That apart and in any event, the impugned order of assessment is appealable and the appellants/writ petitioners have a statutory alternative efficacious remedy as correctly observed by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order dated 4th June, 2018. 10. In an Intra-Court Mandamus Appeal, interference is usually warranted when palpable infirmities or perversities are noticed. 9. That apart and in any event, the impugned order of assessment is appealable and the appellants/writ petitioners have a statutory alternative efficacious remedy as correctly observed by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order dated 4th June, 2018. 10. In an Intra-Court Mandamus Appeal, interference is usually warranted when palpable infirmities or perversities are noticed. On a plain reading of the impugned judgment and order, we do not notice any such palpable infirmity or perversity. Moreover, the impugned judgment and order has been rendered with cogent and justifiable reasons. 11. For reasons stated above, the appeal and the application for stay are liable to be dismissed and stand accordingly dismissed. 12. We, however, wish to make it clear that all points sought to be raised before the writ Court in respect of the order of assessment - which was the subject-matter of challenge in the writ proceeding - are kept open to be decided by the statutory appellate forum in accordance with law. 13. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties.