Statutory remedy bars writ challenge to show-cause notices; noticee must first and contest before adjudicating authority.

A writ petition challenging show-cause notices under Article 226 was held ordinarily not maintainable where an efficacious statutory remedy exists before the adjudicating authority. The notices alleged contravention of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and wrongful availment of exemption under Notification No. 69/86-C.E. The Court held that the noticee should first file a reply and raise objections before the appropriate statutory forum, and the writ court should not interfere at the notice stage. The petitioner was relegated to the adjudicatory process, and the authority was directed to decide the matter in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the show-cause notices under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was maintainable in view of the availability of an efficacious statutory remedy before the adjudicating authority.

Analysis: The challenge was directed against show-cause notices proposing action for alleged contravention of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and alleged wrongful availment of exemption under Notification No. 69/86-C.E. The Court held that where a statutory forum is available to the noticee to submit a reply, raise objections, and contest the matter in accordance with law, the writ court should ordinarily not interfere at the notice stage. The petitioner was therefore directed to place its reply before the appropriate authority, which was required to decide the matter in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on merits and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory adjudicatory process.

---