M/S Jaiswal Steel Traders Bhadohi vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Held

The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable. The reasoning is based on the availability of a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, against the impugned order passed under Section 130 of the Act. The ratio decidendi is that where a specific statutory remedy of appeal is provided by law, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is generally not maintainable, unless there are exceptional circumstances such as violation of principles of natural justice or the order being without jurisdiction, which were not argued or established in this case. The Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's case. The operative direction is the dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Jaiswal Steel Traders Bhadohi, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 06.03.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (SIB), Commercial Tax, Mirzapur Range, Mirzapur, under Section 130 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The respondents, represented by learned special counsel, contended that the writ petition was not maintainable because the impugned order was appealable under Section 107 of the Act, 2017. The High Court heard arguments from both sides.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner's contention, implied by filing a writ petition, is that the writ petition should be entertained despite the availability of an appeal. The respondent's contention is that the writ petition is not maintainable due to the existence of the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Act, 2017, as the impugned order is appealable.