Arun Madan, J.-It is a revision petition challenging the order of the Additional District Judge, Ramganj Mandi (Kota) who returned the claim of the petitioners (plaintiffs) holding that the suit was not of urgent nature inasmuch as notice Under Section 80, CPC and 271 of the Municipalities Act ought to have been served upon the respondents-State and the Municipality prior to institution of the suit, but failed to do so.

.2. Shri Mahesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that as per 5, 271 of the Municipalities

.Act no prior notice is required to institute a suit for permanent injunction except for declaration, inasmuch as in a suit for twin reliefs, i,e, seeking permanent injunction and declaration against the State and the Municipality, which are independent of each other, each of them could be claimed separately and independently in one suit, either by denying or accepting one of them and in these circumstances, the trial Court ought not to have returned the suit for permanent injunction but only suit for declaration ought to have been return thereby it committed material illegality with irregularity by returning the plaint in toto. Second contention u