Availability of alternative statutory remedy under Section 323(3) of Bihar Municipal Act precludes exercise of writ jurisdiction.

The petitioner, Shahnaz Yunus, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 17.02.2026 passed by the Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation (PMC), in Vigilance Case No. 86B/2025

The impugned order directed the sealing of the petitioner’s under-construction residential building within 24 hours, purportedly under Section 324(4) of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007

The petitioner sought the quashing of this order, a restraint on coercive actions, and a direction for proper measurement and verification of the building in her presence

The PMC raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition due to the existence of an alternative statutory remedy

Whether the writ petition is maintainable in light of the alternative statutory remedy provided under the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007

Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim protection against coercive action pending the filing of a statutory appeal

The Court primarily applied Section 323(3) of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007, which provides that any person aggrieved by an order of the Chief Municipal Officer regarding the demolition or stoppage of building works may, within thirty days, prefer an appeal to the Municipal Building Tribunal appointed under Section 329

The Court evaluated the PMC's submission that the petitioner possessed an "alternative and efficacious remedy" under the Bihar Municipal Act

Upon reviewing Section 323(3), the Court agreed that the statutory framework provides a specific forum—the Municipal Building Tribunal—for adjudicating such grievances

the Court declined to exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction on the merits at this stage, choosing instead to redirect the petitioner to the specialized tribunal

acknowledging that the property in question is a residential house and the sealing order was imminent, the Court exercised its discretion to provide a narrow window of protection

This ensures that the petitioner is not rendered remedy-less by coercive action before the Tribunal can hear the application for interim relief

It further directed the Tribunal to decide any prayer for interim orders in accordance with the law

the Court ordered that no coercive steps shall be taken by the PMC pursuant to the order dated 17.02.2026 until 26.03.2026 or until the disposal of the interim prayer by the Tribunal, whichever occurs earlier