JUDGMENT : Leave granted. 2. The order under challenge summarily dismissed the writ petition that was filed by the appellant for the reason that the alternative remedy available to the appellant had not been invoked. The appellant impugns the order for the reason that the writ petition raised questions about constitutionality which could not have been raised in the alternative forum. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant draws our attention to the body of the writ petition in which the vires of certain provisions are contested, though this is not apparent from the prayer in the writ petition. We think it is appropriate, in the circumstances, that the writ petition should be restored to the file of the High Court to be heard and disposed of on merits. The appellant shall have the liberty to amend the prayer of the writ petition. 4. Pending the disposal of the writ petition, the following statements are made : Learned Counsel for the appellant states that the appellant shall pay the excise duty on the basis of its actual production. Learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the respondents, states that no coercive action shall be taken to recover the alleged balance excise duty. 5. The civil appeal is allowed. 6. No order as to costs.