Alternate statutory remedy limits writ jurisdiction unless exceptional grounds justify bypassing the appellate forum.

An efficacious statutory appeal under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 ordinarily bars invocation of writ jurisdiction, because the appellate forum can examine factual and legal objections, including jurisdictional issues and alleged breach of natural justice. Departure from the alternate-remedy rule is justified only in exceptional cases such as patent lack of jurisdiction, gross injustice, or a violation incapable of adequate appellate correction. Complaints about non-consideration of documents and the auditor's certificate were treated as matters for the appellate authority to assess on the original records. The writ petition was therefore held not maintainable and the petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained despite the availability of an efficacious statutory appeal under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, on grounds including alleged violation of natural justice and lack of jurisdiction.

Analysis: The statutory appellate forum was found competent to examine all legal and factual objections, including jurisdictional objections and alleged breach of natural justice. The availability of an alternate remedy is a rule of self-imposed restraint in writ jurisdiction, and departure from that rule is justified only in exceptional situations such as gross injustice, patent lack of jurisdiction, or a clear violation that cannot be remedied in appeal. The grievance regarding non-consideration of documents and the auditor's certificate was held to be a matter for appreciation by the appellate authority, which could call for the original records and decide the dispute on merits.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable in the facts of the case and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked to bypass the appellate forum, and allegations of natural justice violation or jurisdictional error should be left to be examined by the appellate authority unless exceptional grounds are established.

---