Subrata Deb Mallick vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Held

The Court allowed the withdrawal of the writ petition. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's explicit request to pursue the alternative remedy available before the appellate tribunal. The State did not oppose this request. The Court's decision is that the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that a party should be allowed to withdraw a writ petition if they intend to pursue a statutory remedy, especially when the opposing party does not object. The operative direction is that the petitioner is granted liberty to approach the appellate tribunal within a period of four weeks from the date of the order, in accordance with the law.

Facts

The petitioner, Subrata Deb Mallick, filed a writ petition before the High Court. The petitioner's counsel, Ms. Sanjana Jha, informed the Court that she had instructions to withdraw the writ petition. The reason for withdrawal was to allow the petitioner to pursue the remedy available before the appellate tribunal under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax (WBGST) Act, 2017, and the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. The State, represented by Ms. Manasi Mukherjee, did not raise any objection to the withdrawal. The Court was informed of this development on July 29, 2026.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to avail the remedy before the appellate tribunal under the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that they wished to withdraw the writ petition to pursue their remedies before the appellate tribunal. They relied on the instructions received by their counsel to this effect. The State did not present any arguments against the withdrawal.