Alternative statutory remedy under SEBI regime bars writ intervention where the dispute can be decided by the regulator first.

A writ petition concerning a securities-law dispute was declined because the matter was capable of adjudication within the SEBI statutory framework. The Court held that where the governing scheme provides a complete hierarchy of remedies, including an appeal from SEBI's decision, the writ court should not entertain the petition in the first instance. The petitioner had already filed a complaint before SEBI, and the Court directed that forum to consider the grievance expeditiously after hearing the concerned parties. The controversy was therefore left to the competent statutory authority for determination under the SEBI regime.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petition should be entertained in view of the availability of an alternative statutory remedy before the competent authority under the SEBI regime.

Analysis: The dispute raised by the petitioner was found to be capable of adjudication by SEBI under the governing securities law framework. Since the statutory scheme provided a complete hierarchy of remedies, including an appeal against SEBI's decision, the Court declined to entertain the writ petition. The petitioner had already approached SEBI with a complaint, and that forum was directed to consider the matter expeditiously after hearing the concerned parties.

Conclusion: The petition was not entertained and the petitioner was relegated to the competent statutory authority for decision on the controversy.

---