Maintainability of writ challenge fails where only consequential dismissal is assailed and foundational orders remain unchallenged.

A writ petition confined to challenging only the consequential dismissal of an appeal for non-compliance with a statutory pre-deposit direction was held not maintainable where the petitioner had not assailed either the underlying assessment order or the pre-deposit order itself. The stated principle is that a challenge to a derivative dismissal cannot succeed while the foundation orders remain unchallenged, because the adverse consequence flows from those unreversed orders. The petition was dismissed on that basis.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging only the consequential dismissal of the appeal was maintainable without assailing the assessment order and the earlier pre-deposit order.

Analysis: The petitioner's appeal before the Tribunal had been dismissed for non-compliance with the direction to deposit the disputed duty amount as a condition for hearing under the statutory pre-deposit regime. The petitioner did not challenge either the underlying assessment order or the Tribunal's order requiring pre-deposit. In such circumstances, a challenge confined to the consequential order of dismissal could not succeed, because the foundation orders remained unassailed.

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

---