Alternative statutory remedy bars Article 226 writ where the Assam Panchayati Raj Act provides adequate appeal and revision.

A writ petition challenging a settlement order under the Assam Panchayati Raj Act, 1972 was found not maintainable under Article 226 because the Act provided an adequate and efficacious statutory remedy. The statutory scheme allowed appeal and revision against orders relating to settlement of hats and bazaars, including revisional relief under Section 138(2), which was available to an aggrieved person. As no violation of constitutional rights or principles of natural justice was shown, the Court treated the alternative remedy as sufficient and dismissed the petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable under Article 226 in view of the statutory remedy under Section 138 of the Assam Panchayati Raj Act, 1972.

Analysis: The petition challenged a settlement order passed under the Assam Panchayati Raj Act, 1972. The statutory scheme provided appeal and revision against orders relating to settlement of hats and bazaars, and the revisional power under Section 138(2) was available to an aggrieved person. The Court found that the remedy under the Act was adequate and efficacious, capable of granting the relief sought, and that no violation of constitutional rights or principles of natural justice was shown.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had an alternative, adequate and efficacious statutory remedy, and the petition was dismissed.

---