Educational Testing Services vs. Additional Director

Held

The Court accepted the submission that the writ petitions related to GST disputes were inadvertently listed with other matters and had been disposed of by a separate order on December 17, 2025. Therefore, no further orders were required for these petitions. In the case of W.P.No.35830/2025, in light of the Division Bench's order in W.A.No.1089/2026, which restored the matter for reconsideration on merits, the writ petition was de-tagged. The Court directed the office to relist this petition for preliminary hearing on August 11, 2026. The reasoning for the initial disposal was based on the parties' consensus regarding a prior order. The relisting of W.P.No.35830/2025 was a procedural step following the Division Bench's directive.

Facts

The petitioners, including M/s. Edge Solutions, filed writ petitions challenging orders related to Goods and Services Tax (GST). These petitions were initially listed along with other matters. However, the counsels for the parties clarified that the dispute pertains to GST and that these specific petitions were disposed of by a separate order on December 17, 2025. In one connected matter, W.P.No.35830/2025, the petitioner's counsel stated that the writ petition was disposed of by a common order. The Revenue had filed an appeal (W.A.No.1089/2026) against this common order, and the Division Bench had restored the matter for reconsideration, directing that the writ appeal be adjudicated on merits. The High Court perused the Division Bench's order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petitions concerning GST disputes, which were listed with other matters, should be treated as disposed of by a separate order dated December 17, 2025, as stated by the counsels? Petitioner's Argument: The counsels for the parties are categorical in stating that there is an inadvertence in having these matters listed along with other matters as the dispute relates to GST and these petitions stand disposed of by a separate order on December 17, 2025. Revenue's Argument: Not recorded in the judgment for the initial set of petitions. For W.P.No.35830/2025, the Revenue's counsel was heard in light of the Division Bench's order which restored the matter for reconsideration on merits.