M/S Baleswar Commercial PVT Ltdand Another vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Held

The Court considered the submissions of both parties. The CGST Authorities informed the Court that a final adjudication order had already been passed on July 14, 2021, and that it would be communicated to the petitioner within a week. Given this submission, the Court was of the view that no further orders were necessary to be passed in the writ petition. The Court's decision was based on the fact that the grievance of the petitioner, which was the non-disposal of their reply, had been addressed by the passing of a final order. The ratio decidendi is that once a final order has been passed by the adjudicating authority, a writ petition seeking direction for disposal of the reply becomes infructuous. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Baleswar Commercial Pvt. Ltd & Anr., filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the inaction of the CGST Authorities in not disposing of their reply dated October 28, 2020, to a show-cause notice dated August 28, 2020. The petitioner's grievance was that their reply had not been adjudicated upon. The respondents, Union of India & Ors. (CGST Authorities), submitted that a final adjudication order had already been passed on July 14, 2021, and undertook to communicate this order to the petitioner within a week.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when the adjudication process, though delayed, has culminated in a final order? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that their reply to the show-cause notice had not been disposed of, leading to a grievance regarding the lack of finality in the proceedings. Revenue's Argument: The CGST Authorities contended that a final adjudication order had been passed on July 14, 2021, and that this order would be communicated to the petitioner shortly. They implicitly argued that the writ petition was rendered infructuous by the passing of the final order.