https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462456 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. en-us Wed, 09 Jan 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jun 2025 17:44:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462456 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. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Jan 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462456