Rubykon Manufacturing Company vs. State Of Haryana And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Rubykon Manufacturing Company, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The petition challenged an order dated December 03, 2024, passed by the respondents (State of Haryana and others). After arguing the matter, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition. The reason for withdrawal was to enable the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Held

The Court allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The primary finding was that the petitioner should be permitted to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal available under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's submission that they intended to challenge the impugned order dated December 03, 2024, through the appellate mechanism. The ratio decidendi is that High Courts may permit withdrawal of writ petitions when a statutory alternative remedy is available and the petitioner expresses a clear intention to avail it. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition as withdrawn with the liberty prayed for, allowing the petitioner to file the appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to pursue an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that they wished to withdraw the petition to avail the statutory remedy of appeal against the order dated December 03, 2024. The respondents did not record any specific argument against the withdrawal, but the court's decision implies consideration of the petitioner's request.