Guru Kripa Five Forks Through Its Proprietor Manoj Kumar Dhingra vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Held
The Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and found the request for withdrawal to be bonafide. The Court held that since the writ petition was filed because the Tribunal was not functional at the relevant time, and the Tribunal has now started functioning, the petitioner's request to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the Tribunal is permissible. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty granted. The Court also directed that the period spent by the petitioner before the High Court, from 11/08/2025 till the date of the order, shall be excluded while calculating the period of limitation for approaching the Tribunal. No other relief was granted, and the merits of the impugned orders were not decided.
Facts
The petitioner, Guru Kripa Five Forks, through its proprietor Manoj Kumar Dhingra, filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior. The petition challenged orders Annexure P/1 and Annexure P/2. The petitioner sought to quash these orders or stay their operation until the Appellate Tribunal under the MP GST Act, 2017 became functional. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the writ petition was filed because the GST Tribunal was not operational at the time. However, the Tribunal has since started functioning. Therefore, the petitioner requested permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the Tribunal against the impugned orders.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the Appellate Tribunal, given that the Tribunal is now functional? The petitioner argued that the writ petition was filed due to the non-functioning of the Tribunal, and since it is now operational, they wish to pursue their remedy before the appropriate forum. The State did not record any specific arguments against this submission, but the Court considered the bonafide nature of the petitioner's request. The core issue revolves around the procedural recourse available to the petitioner in light of the Tribunal's operational status, and whether the High Court should entertain the withdrawal request with liberty to approach the Tribunal.
Sections Cited
MP GST Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Per: Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :- "i - That, Order Impugned Annexure P/1 and Annexure P/2 may kindly be quashed, or ii - That, the effect and operation of the order impugned Annexure P/1 and P/2 may kindly be stayed till the Appellate Tribunal as per the MP GST Act, 2017 comes into operation, and/or iii - Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted."
It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that at the time of filing of this writ petition, the GST Tribunal was not functional and, 1 WP-32283-2025 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.