Maintainability of writ challenge to recovery notice rejected where objections could be raised before the Tribunal.

A writ petition challenging a Debt Recovery Tribunal recovery notice was not entertained because the petitioner had an adequate statutory remedy before the Tribunal. Reliance on an earlier Tehsildar order was treated as a defence to be raised in the pending recovery proceedings, along with all factual and legal objections in a written statement. The writ court declined to examine disputed questions of fact or law at that stage, particularly where no prejudice was shown. The petitioner was directed to pursue its objections before the Tribunal in the recovery proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the Debt Recovery Tribunal notice was maintainable and whether the petitioner could bypass the statutory proceedings before the Tribunal on the basis of the Tehsildar's earlier order.

Analysis: The challenge was directed only against the notice issued by the Tribunal in recovery proceedings. The petitioner's reliance on the Tehsildar's earlier finding was treated as a defence that could be raised before the Tribunal. The proper course was to file a written statement and place all factual and legal pleas before the Tribunal, since the writ court would not decide disputed questions of fact or law at that stage and no prejudice was shown.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained and was dismissed. The petitioner was left to pursue its objections before the Tribunal in the pending recovery proceedings.

---