Sh. Gurjeet Sihgh vs. GST (Network) & Anr.

Facts

The Petitioner, Sh. Gurjeet Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing Respondent No. 1 (GST Network) and Respondent No. 2 (presumably a government authority) to provide information regarding the fraudulent use of his PAN card (BFMPS5288C). Specifically, he requested details such as the e-way bill ID, registration date, name and address of the individual/firm using his PAN, and the associated mobile number and email ID. The Petitioner had previously approached the National Informatics Centre (NIC) regarding this grievance. Respondent No. 2 informed the Court that NIC had forwarded some information to GSTN. This information included an e-way bill ID (07BFMPS5288C1ZO), a registration date (01/02/2018), the Petitioner's name and address, and a mobile number (9811253049). However, GSTN stated they did not possess such details and that NIC might have provided them.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition. It noted the information that had been provided by NIC to GSTN, which included an e-way bill ID, a registration date, the Petitioner's name and address, and a mobile number. However, it was also noted that GSTN stated they did not possess all the requested details and that NIC might have provided them. In light of this, the Court granted liberty to the Petitioner to seek further information from the appropriate authority. This includes obtaining the correct address of the person who was using the Petitioner's PAN number and any available mobile number. The Court did not delve into the merits of whether the use of the PAN was indeed fraudulent, nor did it direct the respondents to conduct a detailed investigation into the misuse. The primary decision was to allow the Petitioner to pursue further information from the relevant authorities.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 to provide all requisite information regarding the misuse/fraudulent use of his PAN Card, including the linked mobile number, email ID, and the name and address of the person/firm on which the e-way bill was registered against the Petitioner's PAN? (Question of law and fact, concerning the right to information and duty of authorities under GST regime). Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner sought comprehensive details to address the fraudulent use of his PAN, implying a right to such information from the concerned authorities. Respondents' Contention: Respondent No. 2, through learned CGSC, presented information received from NIC, indicating that some details were provided. GSTN, as per the communication, stated they did not possess all the requested details, suggesting NIC as the source for certain information. The respondents did not explicitly argue against the Petitioner's right to information but rather presented the information available and the limitations thereof.