Writ remedy barred by statutory appeal where detention order under GST law was already passed and refund was consequential.

A writ challenge to detention proceedings was treated as non-maintainable where an order had already been passed under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and a statutory appeal under Section 107 remained available. The court noted that no live controversy survived for writ intervention in the presence of the appellate remedy. The associated refund claim was regarded as consequential, because refund could arise only if the underlying order was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging detention proceedings and the consequential claim for refund could be entertained when an order had already been passed under the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and an appellate remedy was available.

Analysis: The proceedings had culminated in an order under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of that Act. In these circumstances, no live controversy survived for writ intervention. The request for refund was also consequential, because refund could arise only if the underlying order was set aside.

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

---