Statutory alternative remedy under the Wakf Act bars writ jurisdiction absent recognised exceptions.

Writ jurisdiction was held inappropriate where the Wakf Act provides a complete statutory mechanism before the Tribunal and a revisional remedy under the proviso to Section 83(9). That remedy was treated as an effective alternative remedy, and no recognised exception was shown, such as lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, or any similar ground to bypass the statutory route. On that basis, the writ petition was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed in limine.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable in view of the statutory revisional remedy under Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995.

Analysis: The Act provides a complete machinery for adjudication of wakf disputes before the Tribunal, and the High Court is empowered under the proviso to Section 83(9) to call for and examine the records and confirm, reverse, or modify the Tribunal's determination. That remedy is an effective alternative remedy. The case did not involve challenge to jurisdiction, violation of natural justice, or any other recognised exception to the rule that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised when an efficacious statutory remedy is available.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed in limine.

---