Statutory appeal remedy bars writ jurisdiction where no exceptional circumstance is shown in a revenue matter.

Where an effective statutory appeal remedy exists under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, the High Court will ordinarily decline to entertain a writ petition under Article 226, particularly in revenue matters. The assessment order was appealable under Section 51, and the Act also provided a time limit with only limited condonation of delay before the appellate authority. Because the petitioner did not pursue that remedy and showed no exceptional circumstance for bypassing it, the Court refused to examine the merits and held the writ petition not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable when the petitioner had an effective statutory appeal remedy under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.

Analysis: The assessment order was appealable under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and the statute provided time as well as limited power to condone delay before the appellate authority. The petitioner did not avail that remedy and offered no acceptable explanation for bypassing it. In view of the settled principle that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not to be used to short-circuit statutory remedies, especially in revenue matters, the Court declined to examine the merits.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective statutory appeal remedy exists and no exceptional circumstance is shown, the High Court will ordinarily decline to entertain a writ petition under Article 226, particularly in revenue matters.

---