%^ HIGH COURT QF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WR1T PE'nTION (227) No. 4618 of2008 PETmONER NON-APPLICANT RESPONDENT8 jy.- Daulat Ram Asrani 8/0 Bhagwan Das, Aged about 51 years, R/o Katora Talab, District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS : : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through: Inspector, Station Incharge, City Kotwali, Mahasariiuad (C.G.) ..... applicant 2. Mukesh Kumar Satnanii, Aged about 27 years. 3. Orakar Pal Satnaim. 4. Tamer SinghMehilang. Sr. No. 02,03 & 04 all R/o Kusda, Ward No. 22, PoliceStation Kumhari, District Durg (CG) ..... non-applicant WMT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE227 OFTHE CONSTrTUTION OF DSTDIA SB: Hon'ble Slm Satish K. Aamhotri, J. Present: Shri V.A.Goverdhan, AdvocatewithShri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate fortfae petitioner. Shri Sfaashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respqndent No. 1 ORAL QRDER (Passsd on 25°' day of August, 2008) 1. Section 6-C ofthe Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (forshort 'fhe Act, 1955) provides for an appeal against any order of confiscation passed under section 6-A oftheAct, 1955, to the judieial authority appomted by the State Govemment, wifhin a period of one month. The petitioner has preferred this petition impugiing the order dated 25.05.2008 (Annexure P/l) passed by tfae Collector, Mahasamund, under section 6-AoftheAct,1955. 2. The reasons stated bylfae leamed counsel appearingfor fhepetitionerto approacK tfais Court directly is that the petitioner has not been afforded an apportunityofhearing. ' | 3. Be ttiat as it may, since an appeal is maintainable befbrei Ihejudicial authority i.e; the District Judge, this petition caiinot beientertamed. Nonnallythe High Courtshould not interfere ifthere is an adequate 9^ efBcacious altemative remedy where hierarchy of appeals is provided by the statute, party must exhaust the statutory remedy befbre resortine to writ jurisdiction, except whea a very stroag case is made out for making a departure. (See State ofH.P. and others v. Gujarat Ambuja Cement and another^, U.P.State Spinnmg Co. Ltd. v. R.S.Pandey and another2 and Secy. U.P. High School & Intermediate Education, Allahabad & anotker v. H.K.Lal). . 4. In vsew ofthe above weli settled prmciples oflaw, applying to the facts of the ease on hand this petition is dismissed as not maiatainable. No order asto costs. 5. Consequently, I.A. No. 1, application for grant of ad-interim vvrit, also stands disposed of. '—~- 3— SdA •: :, : SatisfrK.AgBiitou, fudge i-'1 "f 1 (2005) 6 SCC 499 2(2005) S SCC 264 3 (2007) 2 SCC 216 B M .w^r^^stf^^''^-^