Pabitra Nath Marndi vs. The Commnr. Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, Cuttack

Held

The High Court of Orissa at Cuttack held that the present writ petition, W.P.(C) No.32913 of 2023, was to be disposed of in terms of the common order previously passed by the Court on November 6, 2023. This common order was issued in W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 and a batch of other writ petitions. The Court's reasoning is that the present case falls within the ambit of the earlier common order, implying that the issues and facts are sufficiently similar to warrant the same treatment. The ratio decidendi is that where a High Court has passed a common order disposing of a batch of writ petitions, subsequent similar writ petitions can be disposed of in terms of that common order without re-adjudicating the same issues. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in line with the prior common order. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Pabitra Nath Marndi, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack. The petition was against the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Goods and Service Tax, Odisha, and other authorities. The specific order or action under challenge and the tax period(s) are not detailed in this excerpt. The amount in dispute is also not specified. The procedural history indicates that this writ petition was disposed of in terms of a common order previously passed by the Court on November 6, 2023, in a batch of writ petitions, including W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 (M/s. Pravat Kumar Choudhury and others v. Additional State Tax Officer, CT & GST, Cuttack and others).

Key Issues

The primary issue before the Court was whether the writ petition filed by Pabitra Nath Marndi should be disposed of in terms of the common order passed in a batch of related writ petitions. The petitioner, Pabitra Nath Marndi, likely argued that his case was similar to those decided in the common order and therefore, the same relief or disposal mechanism should apply. The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Goods and Service Tax, Odisha, would have likely contended that the common order was correctly applied or that the petitioner's case warranted a specific outcome based on the facts and law. The Court had to decide if the precedent set by the common order on November 6, 2023, was applicable to the present writ petition. The specific legal provisions or precedents relied upon by either side are not detailed in this excerpt, as the judgment simply refers to the common order.