Premature writ challenge rejected where no final tribunal order existed and a third-member reference was still pending.

Writ jurisdiction was held unavailable because the Tribunal had not yet passed an enforceable final order; it had only expressed views on some issues and referred the remaining points to a third member. The challenge was therefore premature, and the petitioner's prior choice to pursue the statutory appeal and participate in the proceedings provided no exceptional basis to bypass the pending tribunal process. The Court dismissed the writ petitions while leaving the petitioner free to challenge the Tribunal's final order after the reference was decided, if necessary.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging the Tribunal's order were maintainable when the matter was still pending before the Tribunal and no enforceable final order had yet been passed.

Analysis: The Tribunal had only expressed opinions on some issues and had referred the remaining points to a third member for decision. As no final enforceable order had emerged, the challenge was premature. The petitioner had already chosen to pursue the statutory appeal and participate in the proceedings, and the Court found no exceptional basis to invoke writ jurisdiction at that stage. The petitioner was left at liberty to challenge the Tribunal's final order, if necessary, after the reference was decided.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable at that stage and were dismissed.

---