It becomes necessary for this Court, to dwell on the ‘rule of alternate remedy’ and its judicial exposition [Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trademarks, Mumbai, (1998) 8 SCC 1; Harbanslal Sahnia v Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., (2003) 2 SCC 107]. When a right is created by a statute, which itself prescribes remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking discretionary remedy under Article 226. The ‘rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies’ is a ‘rule of policy, convenience and discretion’.
– Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, M/s. Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal Pradesh, [Civil Appeal No. 1155 of 2021].
Also see, M/s. Magadh Sugar & Energy Ltd. v. State of Bihar, [Civil Appeal No. 5728 of 2021] decided on 24.09.2021 and State of Telangana v. A.P. State Wakf Board, [Civil Appeal No. 10770 of 2016] decided on 07.02.2022.