Alternative statutory remedies bar writ challenge to assessment and recovery proceedings when the statutory mechanism is complete and efficacious.

Where a statute provides a complete and efficacious remedial mechanism for assessment and recovery disputes, writ jurisdiction should not be used to bypass the prescribed appellate and objection procedures. The Court held that the petitioners had not shown due diligence in seeking certified copies in the prescribed manner, so the grievance of non-supply did not justify bypassing the statutory appeal. It also held that demand notices and certificate proceedings under the recovery law had to be challenged through the statutory scheme, including the available objection and appeal remedies; alleged ante-dating of assessment orders and related factual pleas were matters for the competent authority.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petitions were maintainable on the ground that certified copies of the assessment orders and complete order-sheets were not supplied to the petitioners; and (ii) whether the demand notices and certificate proceedings could be challenged in writ jurisdiction without first availing the statutory remedies under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petitions were maintainable on the ground that certified copies of the assessment orders and complete order-sheets were not supplied to the petitioners.

Analysis: The right of appeal under Section 45 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 was available against the assessment orders, subject to the requirements prescribed under Rule 29 of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules. The Court found that the petitioners had not shown due diligence in seeking certified copies in the prescribed form and had approached the Court after substantial delay. The materials did not establish that the statutory applications for copies were properly made in the prescribed manner, and the grievance of non-supply could not justify bypassing the statutory appellate remedy.

Conclusion: The petitioners were not entitled to invoke writ jurisdiction on this ground.

Issue (ii): Whether the demand notices and certificate proceedings could be challenged in writ jurisdiction without first availing the statutory remedies under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914.

Analysis: The Court held that the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 provides a complete mechanism through notice, objection, determination, and appeal under Sections 6, 7, 9, 10 and 60. Since the petitioners had already participated in the certificate proceedings and had an efficacious statutory remedy, the writ petitions sought to circumvent the legislative scheme. The alleged ante-dating of assessment orders and the plea based on winding-up proceedings were treated as matters to be raised before the competent statutory authority and not in writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The demand notices and certificate proceedings could not be challenged in writ jurisdiction without exhausting the statutory remedies.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable in view of the availability of efficacious alternative statutory remedies, and the petitions were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute provides a complete and efficacious remedial mechanism for assessment disputes and recovery proceedings, writ jurisdiction should not be invoked to bypass the prescribed statutory remedies.

---