https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47811 The Madras High Court, in a judgment by Chief Justice Markandey Katju and Justice D. Murugesan, emphasized the importance of exhausting statutory remedies under the Central Excise Act before resorting to writ jurisdiction. Citing various Supreme Court decisions, the Court dismissed a writ petition despite entertaining it initially, highlighting the principle that when alternative remedies exist, the writ jurisdiction of the Court should not be invoked. The Court stressed the need for self-discipline among judges to uphold this principle and reiterated the necessity of exhausting hierarchical appeals provided by statutes before seeking writ jurisdiction. en-us Wed, 02 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47811 The Madras High Court, in a judgment by Chief Justice Markandey Katju and Justice D. Murugesan, emphasized the importance of exhausting statutory remedies under the Central Excise Act before resorting to writ jurisdiction. Citing various Supreme Court decisions, the Court dismissed a writ petition despite entertaining it initially, highlighting the principle that when alternative remedies exist, the writ jurisdiction of the Court should not be invoked. The Court stressed the need for self-discipline among judges to uphold this principle and reiterated the necessity of exhausting hierarchical appeals provided by statutes before seeking writ jurisdiction. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47811