Bidya Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Held

The Court condoned the marginal delay in filing the restoration application (CAN 2 of 2025), accepting the petitioner's explanation that they were prevented by sufficient cause from appearing on November 29, 2024. Consequently, the Court recalled the order dated November 29, 2024, which had dismissed the writ petition (WPA 17711 of 2024) for default. The writ petition was restored to its original file and number. The Court directed the writ petition to be listed in the Combined Monthly List of June 2025. The applications CAN 1 of 2025 and CAN 2 of 2025 were disposed of accordingly. No specific GST provisions were discussed or relied upon in this order, as it pertains to procedural restoration.

Facts

The petitioner, Bidya Singh, filed a writ petition (WPA 17711 of 2024) before the Calcutta High Court. The writ petition was dismissed for default on November 29, 2024, due to the petitioner's absence. Subsequently, the petitioner filed CAN 1 of 2025, an application to recall the dismissal order, and CAN 2 of 2025, an application for condonation of delay in filing the restoration application. The petitioner's advocate argued that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing on the previous date.

Key Issues

1. Whether the delay in filing the application for restoration (CAN 2 of 2025) should be condoned, considering the petitioner's explanation for non-appearance on November 29, 2024. 2. Whether the order dated November 29, 2024, dismissing the writ petition (WPA 17711 of 2024) for default should be recalled. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that there was a marginal delay in filing the restoration application and that they were prevented by sufficient cause from appearing on the date the writ petition was dismissed. Revenue/State's Arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the CGST authorities on these applications.