M/S Goyal Color Lab vs. Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Goyal Color Lab, filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice issued by the revenue authorities. During the pendency of this petition before the Rajasthan High Court, the revenue authorities passed a final order pursuant to the impugned show cause notice. The petitioner did not seek to amend the writ petition to challenge the final order. The High Court considered the passing of the final order during the pendency of the petition.

Held

The High Court held that the writ petition challenging the show cause notice had become infructuous because a final order had been passed by the revenue authorities during the pendency of the petition. Instead of allowing the petitioner to amend the petition to challenge the final order, the Court chose to dispose of the petition as having become infructuous. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to pursue any available legal remedy against the final order. The ratio decidendi is that once a final order is passed in adjudication, a writ petition challenging the pre-adjudication notice becomes infructuous, and the aggrieved party should pursue remedies against the final order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition challenging the show cause notice has become infructuous due to the passing of the final order by the revenue authorities during the pendency of the petition? Petitioner's argument: Not explicitly recorded in the judgment. The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition, implying a challenge to the procedural fairness or legality of the show cause notice. However, with the final order being passed, the focus shifts to the subsequent remedy. Revenue's argument: The revenue authorities, by passing the final order, have completed the adjudication process initiated by the show cause notice. This action renders the challenge to the show cause notice itself moot, as the substantive issue is now governed by the final order.