Alternative statutory remedy bars writ against show-cause notice, while limited interim protection may preserve status quo.

A writ petition against a show-cause notice proposing penalty under the Central excise framework was not entertained because the petitioner had not first replied to the notice or pursued the available statutory adjudicatory process. The ordinary rule against bypassing an efficacious alternative remedy therefore applied, and the petitioner was required to respond before the competent authority, which was directed to pass a speaking order. Pending that adjudication, coercive recovery was stayed to preserve the status quo until a reasoned decision was made.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable when the petitioner had not exhausted the alternative statutory remedy against a show-cause notice, and whether protective directions were warranted pending adjudication.

Analysis: The dispute arose at the stage of a show-cause notice proposing penalty under the Central excise framework. The petitioner approached the writ court without submitting a reply to the notice or allowing the statutory adjudicatory process to proceed. In such circumstances, the ordinary rule against bypassing the available appeal or adjudication mechanism applied. The Court nevertheless considered it appropriate to safeguard the petitioner from coercive recovery until the competent authority decided the matter after receiving a reply.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained as a substitute for the statutory remedy, and the petitioner was directed to respond to the notice before the appropriate authority, which was also directed to pass a speaking order while recovery remained stayed till then.

Final Conclusion: The matter was disposed of by requiring the petitioner to pursue the statutory adjudicatory route, with interim protection against recovery until a reasoned order was passed.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition should ordinarily not be entertained against a show-cause notice when an efficacious statutory remedy remains available, though the court may issue limited protective directions to preserve the status quo pending adjudication.

---