P Pechi vs. The Superintendent

Facts

The petitioner, P Pechi, filed a writ petition seeking to quash the proceedings of the Respondent, the Superintendent, Palayamkottai Range, Tirunelveli, dated 08-08-2024. The petitioner also sought a direction to revoke the cancellation of their GST registration bearing GSTIN/UIN.33CFA PP9501A1ZZ. The case was listed for mention concerning the appearance of the respondent's counsel. Previously, on 09.01.2025, the Court had recorded the appearance of Mr. R. Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, for the respondent. However, a letter was circulated by Mr. N. Dilip Kumar, learned Central Government Standing Counsel, indicating that the order was passed by the Goods and Services Tax authority and that he appeared for the respondent.

Held

The Court directed the Registry to delete the name of Mr. R. Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, from the appearance column and to print the name of Mr. N. Dilip Kumar, learned Central Government Standing Counsel, as the appearance for the respondent. This correction was to be made on page 1 of the appearance column and in the first paragraph of page 2. Additionally, in the fourth paragraph, second line, the designation 'Additional Government Pleader' was to be deleted and 'learned Central Government Standing Counsel' was to be added. The Court ordered that a fresh copy of the order be issued forthwith reflecting these changes. The core issue addressed was the procedural correction of the respondent's counsel's appearance, not the merits of the GST registration cancellation.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appearance of the correct counsel for the respondent (central government authority) needs to be reflected in the court records, considering the nature of the respondent's authority. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner is seeking to quash an order cancelling their GST registration and wants the registration revoked. The specific arguments regarding the merits of the cancellation are not detailed in this excerpt as the focus is on the procedural aspect of counsel appearance. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent, represented by the Central Government Standing Counsel, is appearing in the matter. The excerpt indicates that the order under challenge was passed by a Goods and Services Tax authority, implying the respondent is a central government entity. The respondent's counsel is seeking to correct the record regarding their appearance.