No Bar In Dismissing 'Admitted' Writ Petition On Ground Of Alternative Remedy, Reiterates SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court has reiterated that after admitting a writ petition, there is no bar on High Court to dismiss it on the ground of alternative remedy.

In this case, a writ petition was filed before the High Court challenging the order of Income Tax authority (determination of liability under Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act). When the matter came up for admission, preliminary objection was raised that alternate and efficacious remedy of filing an appeal was available. The Court, however, admitted the petition and issued notice and also an interim order was passed. Finally while disposing the writ petition, the High Court declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy.

Before the Apex Court (Genpact India Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax), the order of the High Court was impugned raising two issues. One, whether the High Court was justified in refusing to entertain the writ petition because of availability of adequate appellate remedy. The second was whether after admission, the Writ Petition could be dismissed on the ground of alternate remedy.

The bench of Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Indira Banerjee rejected the contention that an appeal would not be maintainable against the determination of liability under Section 115QA of the Act.

On the issue of alternative remedy, the bench referred to Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal and Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore  v. Mathew K.C. In Mathew KC, it was observed that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution ought not to be entertained if alternate statutory remedies are available, except in cases falling within the well-defined exceptions as observed in CIT v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal.

Regarding the other issue, it was contended that the threshold was crossed despite the preliminary objection being raised, the High Court ought not to have considered the issue regarding alternate remedy. The bench noted that, it was without rejecting the preliminary objection, notice was issued in the matter. While upholding the High Court order, the bench referred to the following observations made in State of U.P. v. U.P. Rajya Khanij Vikas Nigam Sangharsh Samiti:

"In our judgment, however, it cannot be laid down as a proposition of law that once a petition is admitted, it could never be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. If such bald contention is upheld, even this Court cannot order dismissal of a writ petition which ought not to have been entertained by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in view of availability of alternative and equally efficacious remedy to the aggrieved party, once the High Court has entertained a writ petition albeit wrongly and granted the relief to the petitioner." 

Click here to Read/Download Judgment