JUDGMENT
O.H. Mootham, C. J.
1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
2. The petitioners have been assessed to sales tax in the sum of Rs. 31,250/- in respect of the assessment year 1952-53. They have appealed against the order of assessment, which is dated 3-5-1955, to the Judge (Appeals), and that appeal is still pending. An application made by the petitioners to the sale tax authorities for stay of execution pending the disposal of their appeal has been refused, and as the petitioners have not paid the tax demanded, their property has been attached and is likely to be sold in the near future.
3. In this petition the petitioners challenged the validity of the assessment order on a number of grounds, and the principal relief which they seek is that the order of assessment be qua-shed by a writ of certiorari.
4. We do not however consider that this is a case in which this Court should intervene. The petitioners have not only an alternative remedy but they are pursuing that remedy, and it is in fact conceded by learned counsel that the real reason why they have come to this Court is because they have been unable to obtain an order of stay from the sales tax authorities. The grant or refusal of aft order of stay is a matter within the discretion of those authorities, and the fact that a stay has been refused is not in our judgment a sufficient ground for this Court to take upon itself the task Of deciding questions which are at present pending before the Judge (Appeals) .
5. The petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.