Statutory revision bars writ jurisdiction against Waqf Tribunal decisions when the Waqf Act provides the specific remedy.

A writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is not maintainable against a Waqf Tribunal decision where the Waqf Act, 1995 provides a statutory revisional remedy under the proviso to Section 83(9). The Act makes the Tribunal's decision final and binding, bars an appeal, and empowers the High Court to examine correctness, legality, or propriety through revision. Where a specific statutory remedy exists, it must ordinarily be pursued, and writ jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass that remedy merely because a party is dissatisfied with the Tribunal's order.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against a decision or order of the Waqf Tribunal when the Waqf Act, 1995 provides a revisional remedy under the proviso to Section 83(9).

Analysis: The statutory scheme of the Waqf Act, 1995 makes the Tribunal's decision final and binding, bars an appeal against its orders, and expressly confers on the High Court revisional power under the proviso to Section 83(9) to examine the correctness, legality, or propriety of the Tribunal's determination. In view of the binding principle that where a statute provides a specific remedy, that remedy alone must ordinarily be pursued, the availability of a statutory revision excludes resort to writ jurisdiction merely because the petitioner is dissatisfied with the Tribunal's decision.

Conclusion: A writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 against a Waqf Tribunal decision is not maintainable when the aggrieved party has a statutory remedy of revision under the proviso to Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act, 1995.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute creates a special tribunal and expressly provides a revisional remedy before the High Court against its decision, writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to bypass that statutory remedy.

---