Alternate statutory remedy cannot defeat writ relief when delay has made the appeal time-barred and ineffective.

Where a writ petition had been admitted and remained pending for years, the High Court should not reject it solely because an alternate statutory appeal was available if that appeal had by then become time-barred. The Court held that directing the litigant to such a remedy would leave it without any effective relief, making dismissal on the ground of alternate remedy unjustified. The High Court's order was set aside, and the writ petition was restored for fresh consideration on merits after hearing the parties.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the writ petition on the ground that the appellant had an alternative statutory remedy by way of appeal, when the writ petition had already remained pending for many years and the appeal would have become time-barred.

Analysis: The writ petition had been admitted long before and was dismissed after a delay of thirteen years only on the ground of availability of an appeal under Section 12B of the Customs Act. In these circumstances, sending the appellant to the alternate remedy would have left it without any effective remedy because the appeal was barred by limitation. The dismissal of the writ petition at that stage was therefore unjustified.

Conclusion: The High Court's order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the High Court for decision on the writ petition in accordance with law after hearing the parties.

Final Conclusion: The appellant succeeded, and the writ petition was restored for fresh consideration by the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a writ petition has been admitted and left pending for years, the Court should not decline relief merely on the ground of alternate statutory remedy if that remedy has become time-barred, leaving the litigant remediless.

---