M/S. Sri Sai Krishna Agencies vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Facts

M/s. Sri Sai Krishna Agencies (Petitioner) filed a Review Application seeking to review an order dated 02.01.2025 passed by the High Court in Writ Petition No. 34706 of 2024. The original writ petition challenged, inter alia, show-cause notices and assessment orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Kothagudem-II Circle (Respondent No. 1). The Petitioner argued that these notices and orders were unsigned. The parties reached a consensus during the hearing of the review application. The consensus was based on a common order passed in other writ petitions (W.P.No.1154 of 2024 and batch) where the Court had dealt with similar issues concerning unsigned notices and orders.

Held

The Court held that the order under review, dated 02.01.2025, should be modified based on the consensus reached by the parties. The Court found that the issue of unsigned show-cause notices and impugned assessment orders had been finally decided in a separate batch of writ petitions (W.P. No. 21101 of 2024 and batch). Consequently, the Court declared the unsigned show-cause notice and the impugned orders as non-est (non-existent in law). The Court reserved liberty for the respondents to issue fresh show-cause notices in accordance with the law and proceed further. Other conditions mentioned in the order passed in W.P. No. 21101 of 2024 and batch were made applicable mutatis mutandis to this case. The order passed in the writ petition was thus modified.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated 02.01.2025 passed in Writ Petition No. 34706 of 2024, which relegated the petitioner to the remedy of appeal, needs to be reviewed and recalled in light of a subsequent development and consensus between the parties. Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner argued that the original writ petition challenged unsigned show-cause notices and assessment orders. They relied on the consensus reached with the respondents, acknowledging that a separate batch of writ petitions (W.P. No. 21101 of 2024 and batch) had finally decided the issue of unsigned notices and orders. Therefore, the Petitioner contended that it would be pointless to relegate them to the appellate remedy. Revenue/State's Contention: The Revenue/State agreed with the Petitioner that the issue of unsigned notices and orders had been finally decided in W.P. No. 21101 of 2024 and batch. They consented to the review petition being disposed of in terms of that order, implying that the unsigned notices and orders should be treated as invalid.