9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition under Article 226 of the Constitution, unless there are good grounds to do, otherwise. Where hierarchy of appeals is provided by the statute, the party must exhaust the statutory remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction. We permit the writ petitioner to prefer a statutory appeal, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - W.A.No.894 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 4-6-2018 - S. Manikumar And V. Bhavani Subbaroyan, JJ. For Appellant : Mr.B.Satish Sundar Judgment ( Order of the Court was delivered by S. Manikumar, J ) Being aggrieved by the order in original dated 24.03.2015, revoking Customs House Agent Licence, W.P.No.639 of 2006 has been filed, for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to quash the records of the respondent in F.No.R-609/CHA, Order-in-Original No.35928/2015 dated 24.03.2015, and for a further direction to the respondent to renew and activate the petitioner/appellant's Custom House Agent Licence in No.R-609/CHA. 2. Though, the said order was mainly challenged on the grounds that the reasons for disagreeing with the enquiry report was not furnished an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule of law. Despite the existence of an alternative remedy it is within the jurisdiction or discretion of the High Court to grant relief under Article 226 of the Constitution. At the same time, it cannot be lost sight of that though the matter relating to an alternative remedy has nothing to do with the jurisdiction of the case, normally the High Court should not interfere if there is an adequate efficacious alternative remedy. If somebody approaches the High Court without availing the alternative remedy provided, the high Court should ensure that he has made out a strong case or that there exist good grounds to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction. (iv) In United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon and Others {(2010) 8 SCC 110}, the Hon'ble Apex Court, at paragraph Nos.43 to 45, held as follows:- 43. Unfortunately, the High Court overlooked the settled law that the High Court will ordinarily not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective remedy is available to the aggrieved person and that this rule applies with greater rigour in matters involving recovery of taxes, cess, fees, other types of public money and the dues of banks and ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule of alternative remedy. However, the high Court will not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved person or the statute under which the action complained of has been taken itself contains a mechanism for redressal or grievance still holds the field. (vi) The Hon'ble Apex Court, after considering a catena of cases, in Shauntlabai Derkar and Another Vs. Maroti Dewaji Wadaskar {(2014) 1 Supreme Court Cases 602}, at para Nos.15 to 18, held as follows:- 15. Thus, while it can be said that this Court has recognised some exceptions to the rule of alternative remedy i.e, where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question, or in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure, or has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed, or when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice, the proposition laid down in Thansingh Nathmal Case {Thansigh Nathmal Vs. Supt. of Taxes, AIR 1964 SC 1419}, Titaghur Paper Mills Case {Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd Vs. State of Orissa (1983) 2 SCC 433 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... If the petition is filed before the appellate authority within the time granted by this Court, the appellate authority within the time granted by this Court, the appellate authority shall consider the petition only on merits without any reference to the period of limitation. However, it is clarified that the appellate authority shall not be influenced by any observation made by the High Court while disposing of Writ Petition (Civil) No.44 of 2009, in its judgment and order dated 5/10/2010. (vii) After considering a plethora of judgments, in Union of India and Others Vs.Major General Shri Kant Sharma and Another {(2015) 6 SCC 773}, at para36, the Apex Court held as follows:- The aforesaid decisions rendered by this Court can be summarised as follows:- (i). The power of judicial review vested in the High Court under Article 226 is one of the basic essential features of the Constitution and any legislation including the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 cannot override or curtail jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (Refer: L.Chandrakumar Vs. Union of India (1997) 3 SCC 261 and S.N.Mukherjee Vs. Union of India (1990) 4 SCC 594. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
