Purushottam Lal vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

WP/9407/2020HC Madhya PradeshGST18 March 2025Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT1 pages
For Petitioner: Narayan Prasad Dubey
AI SummaryWithdrawn

Held

The Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. This decision was based on the submission by the respondents that a letter dated March 17, 2025, had been issued to the petitioner. This letter stipulated that upon the deposit of Rs. 1,07,134/-, which included land rent, interest, fee for extension of time, and GST, the J.D.A. would proceed with granting the No Objection Certificate (NOC). The Court accepted this submission and concluded that the purpose of the writ petition was rendered moot by the subsequent action and communication from the respondents. The ratio decidendi is that if a party takes steps to resolve the underlying issue that led to the filing of a writ petition, and communicates this to the petitioner, the petition may be considered infructuous. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition, directing the J.D.A. to proceed further upon the deposit of the specified amount by the petitioner.

Facts

The petitioner, Purushottam Lal, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur. The respondents, the State of Madhya Pradesh and others, submitted that a letter was issued on March 17, 2025, directing the petitioner to deposit a total of Rs. 1,07,134/- within 15 days. This amount included land rent, interest, fee for extension of time, and GST. Upon deposit, the J.D.A. would proceed with granting a No Objection Certificate (NOC). The respondents contended that in light of this letter, the writ petition had become infructuous.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition has become infructuous in light of the letter dated 17.03.2025 issued by the respondents? (Question of fact) Petitioner's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the petitioner regarding the issues. The petition was disposed of based on the submissions of the respondents. Revenue/State's Argument: The respondents argued that a letter dated 17.03.2025 was issued, directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1,07,134/- (including land rent, interest, fee for extension of time, and GST) within 15 days for the J.D.A. to proceed with granting an NOC. Based on this, they contended that the writ petition had become infructuous.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT ON THE 18th OF MARCH, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 9407 of 2020 PURUSHOTTAM LAL Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance: Shri Nitin Dubey - Advocate for petitioner. Shri Utkarsh Kumar Sonkar - Advocate for respondent No.2 and 3.

ORDER Counsel appearing for respondents submitted that a letter has been issued on 17.03.2025 directing petitioner to deposit land rent, interest, fee for extension of time, GST, etc. total amounting to Rs.1,07,134/- within period of 15 dyas. On deposit of said amount, J.D.A. will proceed further for granting of NOC. In view of aforesaid letter, writ petition has become infructuous.

2.

In view of aforesaid, writ petition is disposed off directing J.D.A. to proceed further on deposit of said amount.

sp/-

1 WP-9407-2020 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:13502

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.

See plans and prices

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.