Ismail vs. State Of Karnataka

Facts

The petitioner, Ismail, proprietor of M/s TFT Traders, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging the physical verification order dated June 19, 2025, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement), Shivamogga. The petition was filed seeking the release of a vehicle and goods. During the pendency of the writ petition, the goods and vehicle were released by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes vide order dated July 23, 2025 (GST MOV-05). Consequently, the petitioner filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the writ petition as it had become infructuous.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. The petitioner had approached the Court seeking the release of a vehicle and goods. However, during the pendency of the petition, the respondent authority released the said goods and vehicle. The Court noted the memo filed by the petitioner stating this fact and seeking withdrawal. Based on the memo and the fact that the relief sought was already granted, the Court found no further purpose for the petition to continue. Therefore, the Court disposed of the petition as withdrawn, acknowledging that the matter had been resolved by the subsequent action of the respondent.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition, filed challenging a physical verification order and seeking release of goods and vehicle, has become infructuous due to the subsequent release of the goods and vehicle by the respondent authority? The petitioner argued that the writ petition had become infructuous because the goods and vehicle, which were the subject of the challenge and the relief sought, had already been released by the respondent. Therefore, the original purpose of filing the petition was no longer extant, and it was appropriate to withdraw it. The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.