Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 282 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Gupta Respondent :- The Excise Commissioner Up Prayagraj And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajai Kumar Malviya,Rajesh Kumar Singh,Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J. At the very outset, Shri Ravi Shanker Pandey, learned ACSC raises a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that against the impugned order, the petitioner has equally, efficacious alternative remedy of filing revision under section 11(2) of Excise Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the said fact. In view of the above as well as the judgements of the Apex Court in United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon & Others [(2010) 8 SCC 110] (paragraph no. 43), Radha Krishan Industries Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Others [(2021) 6 SCC 771] (paragraph no. 27.5) and Varimadugu Obi Reddy Vs. B. Sreenivasulu & Others [(2023) 2 SCC 168] (paragraph no. 36), the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. Certified copy of the impugned order, if any, shall be returned after retaining its photostat copy. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Rahul Dwivedi/- Digitally signed by :- RAHUL DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad