Writ relief and delay: unexplained laches can defeat a valid challenge to assessment enforcement.

A writ challenge to assessment enforcement can fail where the assessee delays approaching the High Court for nearly four years and bypasses the statutory appeal remedy. Although the levy on works contract turnover was treated as legally unsustainable, Article 226 relief remained discretionary and required due diligence. Unexplained and unconscionable delay, together with failure to pursue the available appellate remedy, justified refusal of writ relief on the ground of delay and laches.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to relief under Article 226 despite substantial delay and laches in challenging the assessment.

Analysis: The appeal arose from a writ petition seeking to restrain enforcement of the assessment to the extent it related to works contracts. The Court accepted that the levy on works contract turnover was unsustainable in law, but held that the decisive question was whether discretionary relief under Article 226 should be granted after the appellant had allowed nearly four years to elapse before approaching the Court. The appellant had not pursued the statutory appeal provided under the sales tax law and offered no convincing explanation for the delay. The Court reaffirmed that a person seeking writ relief must act with due diligence and that unexplained and unconscionable delay may justify refusal of relief even where the underlying legal grievance may otherwise be arguable.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to writ relief because the petition was barred by delay and laches.

---