The mere existence of an alternate remedy does not by itself bar the High Court from exercising its writ jurisdiction & the power of judicial review with which the High Court is vested under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be taken away merely because an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available – Sunil Tandon Vs. Union of India & Anr – Delhi High Court
November 18, 2021
Hon'ble High Court held that the mere existence of an alternate remedy does not by itself bar the High Court from exercising its writ jurisdiction. The power of judicial review with which the High Court is vested under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be taken away merely because an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available. However, it cannot be denied that the power of the High Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 even when an alternative statutory remedy is available, is ultimately only discretionary and therefore, it is for the High Court to consider whether, in the facts of the case, a party must be relegated to the available statutory remedy. There can be no dispute with the proposition urged by the petitioner that one of the factors which the High Court will consider while exercising its discretion to entertain a writ petition would be whether the order passed by the Tribunal was without jurisdiction or was merely a case of an error of jurisdiction.