Alternative statutory remedy barred writ jurisdiction where appeal lay against the revisional VAT order.

Writ petitions challenging a revisional order under the Telangana Value Added Tax Act were held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal was available against the revisional order. The Court noted that the petitioners had already been heard by the revisional authority and that Section 33 provided an appellate remedy against an order passed in revision. As the alternative remedy was adequate, writ jurisdiction was not exercised, and the parties were left free to raise their grounds before the appellate authority. The writ petitions were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions were maintainable in view of the statutory remedy of appeal against the revisional order passed under the Telangana Value Added Tax Act, 2005.

Analysis: The impugned action was a revisional order passed under Section 32 of the Telangana Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The statutory scheme provided an appeal under Section 33 against an order passed in revision, and the petitioners had already been heard by the revisional authority. In view of the availability of an efficacious appellate remedy, the Court found no reason to exercise writ jurisdiction. The grounds urged were left open to be raised before the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable and were dismissed.

---