S Vennila vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Held

The Court held that the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 and the consequential order dated 16.11.2024 are non-est in the eye of law because they were issued against a deceased person. The Court noted that the petitioner's father, Thirukadir Sakkarai, died on 20.01.2022, and the impugned orders were passed subsequent to his death. Consequently, the Court found these orders to be unlawful and in violation of the principles of natural justice. The reasoning was that a legal proceeding cannot be initiated or continued against a person who is no longer alive without proper substitution of legal heirs. The ratio decidendi is that any order passed against a deceased individual without impleading the legal representatives is void and liable to be set aside. The Court set aside the impugned orders. However, the respondent was granted liberty to proceed against the legal heirs of the deceased proprietor in accordance with law.

Facts

The petitioner, S. Vennila, as the legal heir of the deceased proprietor Thirukadir Sakkarai of M/s. Pharma Zone, filed a writ petition challenging two orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Madurai Rural (South) Assessment Circle. The impugned orders were dated 30.04.2024 and a consequential order dated 16.11.2024, pertaining to the GSTIN 33ACTPT9307N1ZP/2018-2019. The petitioner's primary contention was that these orders were served on a deceased person, as her father, Thirukadir Sakkarai, had passed away on 20.01.2022, prior to the passing of the impugned orders. The petitioner sought to quash these orders as unlawful, without jurisdiction, and in violation of the principles of natural justice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned orders dated 30.04.2024 and 16.11.2024 are liable to be quashed on the ground that they were passed against a deceased person, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and being non-est in the eyes of law? The petitioner argued that the orders were passed and served on her deceased father, Thirukadir Sakkarai, who died on 20.01.2022. Therefore, the orders are void ab initio and suffer from a jurisdictional defect as they were issued against a dead person. The petitioner contended that this procedural lapse fundamentally violates the principles of natural justice, as no opportunity to be heard could have been provided to the deceased. The petitioner relied on the death certificate as evidence. The respondent, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the validity of the orders passed against a deceased individual.