Pre-deposit orders under excise law are not usually disturbed in writ jurisdiction absent overlooked material grounds.

A writ court will ordinarily not interfere with a Tribunal's pre-deposit direction under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 where the challenge rests on prima facie case and undue hardship under the proviso. The High Court found no basis to disturb the Tribunal's order in writ jurisdiction and declined to entertain the petition on merits. It also noted that if any material ground had been overlooked, the petitioner could seek appropriate reconsideration before the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order directing pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 called for interference in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: The petitioner challenged the pre-deposit direction on the grounds of a prima facie case and undue hardship under the proviso to Section 35F. The Court found no reason to interfere with the Tribunal's order in writ jurisdiction, while observing that if any material ground had been overlooked, the petitioner could approach the Tribunal again for appropriate consideration.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on merits and no interference was granted with the Tribunal's pre-deposit order.

---