The main legal point established in the judgment is the availability of a statutory remedy under Section 9A of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, which rendered the writ petitions not maintainable.

1. - Both the learned counsel for the parties submit at bar that the controversy involved in the present case is no more res integra as the same has been resolved by a coordinate bench of this Court in SBCWP No. 841/2004, Madan Lal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., and connected 65 matters, decided on 22.03.2013 , wherein it has been held as under:-

"Heard learned counsel for the parties in all the above writ petitions.

At the thereshold, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Excise Department submits that in view of statutory remedy available under Section 9A of the Rajasthan Excise Act to the petitioner this writ petition is not maintainable. According to Section 9A of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 statutory remedy of appeal against the order of District Excise Officer is available before the Commissioner of Excise Department for redressal of his grievance, therefore, all the writ petitions may be dismissed. In support of his contention learned counsel for the respondent department invited the attention of this Court towards the judgment of Full Bench of this Court in the case of Gopi Lal Teli v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1995 (2) WLC 1 .

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in most of the cases in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court, the vehicles in question have already been released in favour of respective petitioner on depositing the amount as order by this Court at the time of passing interim order, therefore, the writ petitions may be decided on merit.

After considering arguments advanced by both the parties, I have perused Section 9A of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 which reads as under:

"9-A. Appeals and Revision. - (1) An appeal shall lie-

(a) to the Excise Commissioner from any order passed by an Excise Officer under this Act, and

(b) to the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue established under the provisions of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (Rajasthan Act 15 of 1956) from any order passed by the Excise Commissioner under this Act otherwise than on appeal:

Provided that no appeal shall be entertained unless it is accompanied by a satisfactory proof of payment of 75% of the amount of the demand created by the order appealed against.

(2) Any appeal under sub-Section (1) may be preferred at any time within sixty days from the date of the order complained of.

(3) The decision of the Excise commissioner or the Board of Revenue as the case may be, on such appeal shall, subject to the result of revision, if any, under Sub-Section (4), be final.

(4) The Division Bench of the Board of Revenue may revise any order passed on appeal by the Excise Commissioner.

(5) Any revision under Sub-Section (4) may be preferred at any time within thirty days from the date of the order complained of."
In view of the aforesaid remedy available under the Act all the above writ petitions are hereby disposed of with liberty to petitioners to avail statutory remedy under Section 9.A of the Act of 1950 before the Excise Commissioner/Tax Board within a period of one month from the date of receiving certified copy of this order. In the event of filing appeal by the individual petitioner the same shall be decided expeditiously on merit after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, within a period of one month thereafter and, till decision of the appeal, the interim order, if any, passed by this Court in the writ petition shall remain in force. Further, it is clarified that at the time of deciding the appeal the appellate authority shall consider the prayer of the petitioners for reducing penalty sympathetically and objectively."

2. Accordingly, the present writ petitions are also disposed of in same terms in view of order passed in the case of Madan Lal (supra). No costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the concerned parties forthwith.Petition disposed of.

*******