Writ jurisdiction and alternative statutory remedy: court must respect judicial discipline and avoid bypassing tax adjudication

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not ordinarily be used to bypass an available statutory remedy under the Orissa Sales Tax Act and Rules, especially where disputed questions of fact require examination by the assessing authority. The High Court erred in entertaining the writ petition and quashing the show-cause notice without considering an earlier binding Division Bench view on the same issue. Judicial discipline required the earlier decision to be followed. The High Court's order was set aside, the notice revived, and the assessee was directed to respond before the statutory authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in entertaining the writ petition despite the availability of an alternative statutory remedy, and in quashing the show-cause notice without considering the binding earlier decision on the same issue.

Analysis: The dispute arose from proceedings under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 and the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947. The assessee challenged the show-cause notice directly under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, although disputed questions of fact and statutory remedies were available before the assessing authorities. The High Court entertained the writ petition and quashed the notice without referring to an earlier Division Bench decision that had rejected the same contention for earlier assessment years. The appellate court held that the High Court had ignored the settled parameters governing exercise of writ jurisdiction when an alternative remedy exists and had also failed to follow judicial discipline by not considering the earlier binding view.

Conclusion: The writ petition ought not to have been entertained in the manner adopted by the High Court, and the order quashing the notice was unsustainable; the challenge succeeded in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The High Court's order was set aside, the show-cause notice was revived, and the assessee was left to respond before the statutory authority in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked to bypass an available statutory remedy, and judicial discipline requires a court to consider and follow an earlier binding decision on an identical issue.

---