Statutory appeal bars writ jurisdiction where customs remedies are available and no exceptional circumstances exist.

A writ petition challenging an Order-in-Original under the Customs Act, 1962 was held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal was available. The court found that the petitioner's complaints, including procedural irregularities, lack of reasonable belief, denial of opportunity, and refusal of a redemption option, were issues that could be examined by the appellate authority on facts and law. In the absence of exceptional circumstances, the extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 could not be used to bypass the statutory appellate mechanism, and the petition was dismissed in favour of the alternative remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the Order-in-Original was maintainable in view of the statutory remedy of appeal under the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The impugned order was an Order-in-Original passed under the Customs Act, 1962 and the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal available against it. The grounds urged, including alleged procedural irregularities, want of reasonable belief, denial of opportunity, and non-grant of redemption option, were matters that could be examined by the appellate authority on facts and law. No exceptional circumstance was shown to justify invoking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226, and entertaining the petition would permit circumvention of the statutory appellate mechanism.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal.

Final Conclusion: The Court declined to interfere in writ jurisdiction and required recourse to the appellate remedy under the Customs Act, 1962.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be exercised in the absence of exceptional circumstances.

---