Victoria Grand, Puri vs. Addl. Commnr. Of State Tax (Appeal), Bbsr

Held

The High Court of Orissa, at Cuttack, disposed of the writ petition filed by Victoria Grand, Puri. The Court's decision was to follow the common order previously passed by the same High Court on November 6, 2023, in W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 and a batch of other writ petitions. The reasoning behind this decision is that the present writ petition is being disposed of in terms of that established common order. The specific findings of the November 6, 2023 order are not detailed in this judgment, but it is implied that the issues and relief granted in that order are now applicable to this case. The operative direction is the disposal of the writ petition in accordance with the prior common order. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Victoria Grand, Puri, filed a writ petition before the Orissa High Court. The petition was against the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Bhubaneswar, and other Opposite Parties. The specific order or action under challenge and the tax period(s) are not detailed in the provided text. The amount in dispute is also not stated. The procedural history indicates that this writ petition was disposed of in terms of a common order passed by the High Court on November 6, 2023, in a different writ petition (W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023) and a batch of related writ petitions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present writ petition should be disposed of in terms of the common order passed by this Court on November 6, 2023, in W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 and batch of writ petitions. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner, through their counsel, implicitly agrees to the disposal of this writ petition in line with the aforementioned common order, as the matter is taken up through hybrid mode and the Court proceeds to dispose of it on that basis. Revenue/State's Contention: The Opposite Parties, represented by Mr. Sunil Mishra, Standing Counsel, along with other Additional Standing Counsel, do not appear to have raised any specific arguments against the proposed disposal. Their presence indicates their acknowledgment of the proceedings, and the Court's decision to dispose of the matter based on the previous common order suggests no objection was raised by the revenue.