Orissa High Court
WP(C)/9920/2026 of ALOK KUMAR GUPTA Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 14 May 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.9920 of 2026 Shri Alok Kumar Gupta …. Petitioner Mr. Pronoy Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Mr. Sanjay Rath, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.9920 of 2026
Shri Alok Kumar Gupta
….
Petitioner
Mr. Pronoy Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
….
Opposite Parties
Mr. Sanjay Rath, AGA
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
14.05.2026
01.
1. The order dated 17th September, 2025 passed by the Excise Commissioner, Odisha is sought to be assailed in the instant writ petition.
2. Initially, the order was passed by the same authority, which was assailed by the petitioner before the appellate authority by filing an appeal, who disposed of the said appeal remanding the matter for reconsideration. The Excise Commissioner, Odisha has again finally decided the issue and dismissed the petition.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the appellate authority remanded the matter and the order of dismissal has been passed, it would be a farcical exercise to move the appellate forum.
4. We are unable to comprehend such proposition of law. Once the petitioner approached the appellate authority on an earlier occasion, even if the order is passed after remand, he cannot jump the forum and approach the High Court by filing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. We are reminded of the well settled proposition of law that though the power of judicial review is not restricted to a remedy provided in the statute by way of an appeal, yet the High Court and the Apex Court refuses to entertain such writ petition and relegate the parties to exhaust the remedy provided in the statute. It is the rule of discretion than of compulsion.
6. In view of the facts discerned from the record, we feel that it is not a case where we should exercise the discretion in entertaining the writ petition as the petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of an appeal under the statute.
7. The writ petition is, thus, dismissed. However, dismissal of the writ petition shall not prevent the petitioner to approach the appellate authority, as provided in the statute, in accordance with law. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman) Judge MRS/Laxmikant Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 15-May-2026 11:24:43 Signature Not Verified