Writ jurisdiction cannot test sufficiency of material for search and seizure when statutory authorities act within their powers.

Writ jurisdiction does not extend to reassessing the adequacy or sufficiency of material supporting statutory authorisation for search and seizure where relevant material exists and the authorities act within their powers. The Calcutta HC held that the challenge to authorisation under the Gold Control Act and seizure under the Customs Act and Gold Control Act could not succeed on grounds of lack of authority or insufficiency of material. The competent statutory authorities retained exclusive jurisdiction to investigate the nature of the seized goods and the petitioners' right to possession, and the writ petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the authorisation and consequent search and seizure under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Gold Control Act, 1968 could be quashed in writ jurisdiction on the ground of lack of authority, absence or insufficiency of material, and violation of fundamental rights.

Analysis: The petition challenged the authorisation under Section 58(2) of the Gold Control Act, 1968 and the seizure carried out under Section 105 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 58 of the Gold Control Act, 1968. The Court found that the respondents acted on relevant materials, that the seizure was made according to law, and that the adequacy or sufficiency of the materials forming the basis of authorisation could not be examined in writ jurisdiction. The statutory authorities were held to have exclusive jurisdiction to investigate the nature of the seized goods and the petitioners' right to possession, and the writ proceeding was treated as an attempt to obstruct lawful investigation.

Conclusion: The challenge to the authorisation and seizure failed, and the writ petition was dismissed against the petitioners.

Final Conclusion: The Court declined to interfere with the statutory search and seizure and left the petitioners to pursue their remedies before the competent authorities under the customs and gold control laws.

Ratio Decidendi: In writ jurisdiction, the Court will not reassess the adequacy or sufficiency of the materials on which a statutory authorisation for search and seizure is issued when relevant material exists and the competent authorities act within their statutory powers.

---