Alternative statutory remedy bars writ relief in tax matters when appellate or revisional remedies remain available.

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was held unavailable where the petitioner challenged assessment orders and notices despite an effective statutory remedy of appeal or revision under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. The Court applied the settled rule that an alternative remedy ordinarily bars writ relief, with greater strictness in tax matters, and rejected the argument that a tax-deposit condition for appeal justified bypassing the statutory process. The writ petition was dismissed for failure to exhaust the available appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment orders and notices was maintainable when the petitioner had an effective statutory alternative remedy of appeal or revision under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973.

Analysis: The availability of an effective alternative remedy ordinarily bars recourse to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the rule applies with greater strictness in matters arising under taxing statutes. The Court found that the petitioner had approached the writ court without exhausting the appellate remedy and that the circumstance that tax deposit was a condition for appeal did not justify bypassing the statutory mechanism.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed for failure to avail the statutory alternative remedy.

---