The Supreme Court held that when an effective alternate statutory remedy exists before the High Court under a different jurisdiction, a writ petition becomes non-maintainable.

“The principle, plainly, is that, if a remedy is available to a party before the high court in another jurisdiction, the writ jurisdiction should not normally be exercised on a petition under Article 226…” , observed a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Aravind Kumar while refusing to interfere with the Rajasthan High Court's decision which dismissed the Appellant's Writ petition as non-maintainable as there was an alternate remedy to seek reference before the High Court against the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal Act, 1962 (“Act”).

Dismissing the Appeal, the Court clarified that “while

See Full Page