Shariq Ali Khan vs. Union Territory Of J And K And Ors. (State Taxes Department)

Held

The Court held that the judgment passed in Sheikh Mohammad Yousuf’s case (supra) covers the case of the present petitioner. The Court's reasoning is based on the petitioner's counsel's submission that the case is entirely covered by the prior judgment, which the Court found to be correct upon perusal of the material on record. The ratio decidendi is that if a case is factually and legally similar to a previously decided case by the same High Court, the principles and relief granted in the earlier judgment should be applied. The operative directions issued are that the petitioner should approach the competent authority for registration of his GST Number within 10 days. The competent authority is directed to consider the restoration of the petitioner's GST number, subject to completion of all requisite formalities, in light of the order passed in WP(C) no. 1061/2024. A consideration order is to be passed within four weeks from the date the petitioner provides a certified copy of this order to the competent authority. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Shariq Ali Khan, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar. The petitioner sought relief concerning his GST registration. The petitioner's counsel argued that the case was covered by a previous judgment of the same court in WP(C) no. 1061/2024, titled 'Sheikh Mohammad Yousuf v. Union Territory of J&K and Ors'. The respondents are the Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (State Taxes Department). No specific tax period or amount in dispute was mentioned in the provided text. The procedural history primarily involves the filing of this writ petition and the petitioner's reliance on a prior court order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present writ petition is covered by the judgment dated 26th July, 2024, passed by this Court in WP(C) no. 1061/2024 titled ‘Sheikh Mohammad Yousuf v. Union Territory of J&K and Ors’? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that his case is entirely covered by the aforementioned judgment in Sheikh Mohammad Yousuf's case, implying that the relief granted in that case should also apply to him. The petitioner relied on the judgment in Sheikh Mohammad Yousuf v. Union Territory of J&K and Ors. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions made by the respondents (Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (State Taxes Department)).