Alternative statutory remedy barred writ relief in a fact-based central excise dispute, leaving the appeal route open.

Writ relief was declined where a statutory appeal to the departmental authority was available in a central excise dispute. The controversy was fact-sensitive and was considered suitable for examination on the record before the appellate forum rather than in writ jurisdiction. The petitioner was therefore directed to pursue the statutory appeal, with an application for condonation of delay, as the departmental authorities had indicated willingness to consider such an appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained when a statutory appeal to the Collector was available.

Analysis: The order under challenge arose in a central excise matter and the petitioner sought writ relief despite the existence of an appellate remedy. The Court noted that the controversy turned on facts and could appropriately be examined on the material before the departmental appellate authority. It also considered that the departmental authorities had indicated willingness to examine an appeal with an application for condonation of delay.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained and the petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appeal with an application for condonation of delay.

---