Maintainability of writ against show cause notices denied where statutory remedy exists, with recovery stayed pending speaking order.

A writ petition filed before adjudication of show cause notices was not entertained because the petitioner had an adequate statutory remedy under the excise law and should first submit a reply to the notices. The Court directed the petitioner to file the reply, required the authority to pass a speaking order on that reply, and kept recovery in abeyance until such order is made. The matter was thus left to the statutory process rather than being examined on the merits at the notice stage.

---

---

Issues: Maintainability of the writ petition in view of the statutory appellate remedy and the challenge raised at the stage of show cause notices; entitlement to a direction permitting reply and preserving interim protection against recovery.

Analysis: The petition was filed before adjudication of the show cause notices. The Court declined to entertain the writ at that stage, holding that the petitioner should first respond to the notices and pursue the remedy available under the excise law if the matter is decided adversely. The Court also directed the appropriate authority to pass a speaking order on the reply and kept recovery in abeyance until such order is passed.

Outcome: The writ petition was disposed of with directions to file a reply within two months, for the authority to pass a speaking order thereafter, and with interim stay of recovery until that decision.

---