Alternative statutory remedy bars writ challenge to SARFAESI measures where Tribunal relief remains available.

Writ jurisdiction was held inappropriate where SARFAESI measures, including action under Section 14, were challengeable before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17. Applying the settled principle that an efficacious statutory alternative remedy normally bars a writ petition, and finding no exceptional circumstance to justify bypassing that forum, the High Court declined to entertain the petition. The court noted that the petitioners' objections could be raised before the Tribunal, and dismissed the writ as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging SARFAESI measures was maintainable in view of the alternative remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

Analysis: The challenge arose against action taken under the SARFAESI framework, including proceedings under Section 14, while a statutory remedy under Section 17 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal remained available. In light of settled law discouraging exercise of writ jurisdiction where an efficacious alternate remedy exists, and in the absence of any exceptional circumstance justifying bypass of the statutory forum, the petition was not entertained. The Court also noted that the points raised could be urged before the Tribunal.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed.

---