Writ Courts Shall Not Act As Court Of Appeal Against Decision Of Lower Court Or Tribunals To Correct Errors Of Fact: Bombay High Court

The Supreme Court ruled that writ courts should not interfere with alternate remedies provided by statute for granting relief. The court emphasized that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should be exercised sparingly and only when there is no adequate alternate remedy available. The judgment came in a case where the petitioner sought relief through a writ petition despite having an alternate statutory remedy. The court held that the petitioner should first exhaust the available statutory remedies before approaching the writ court. This ruling underscores the importance of following the prescribed legal procedures and respecting the hierarchy of legal remedies.