M/S Ps Enterprises vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Held

The High Court, without offering any interference on merits at this stage, disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the petitioner's statutory application dated April 30, 2026. This decision was to be made by a reasoned and speaking order. The Court further stipulated that the decision should be made as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of the order. The ratio decidendi is that when a statutory remedy is pending before an authority, the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, may direct the authority to decide the same expeditiously rather than adjudicating the merits of the underlying dispute prematurely.

Facts

The petitioner, M/S Ps Enterprises, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petition concerned a statutory representation dated April 30, 2026, filed under Rule 86A(2) of the UP GST Rules, 2017. This representation was in response to an order dated April 29, 2026, passed under the same Rule. The petitioner stated that this representation was still pending before respondent No. 3. The State of U.P. and two others were the respondents. The matter was heard on October 9, 2026.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should interfere on merits at this stage, given that the petitioner's statutory representation under Rule 86A(2) of the UP GST Rules, 2017, is pending before respondent No. 3. The petitioner argued that their representation, filed in response to an order dated April 29, 2026, has not yet been decided. The revenue did not record any specific arguments on this procedural aspect, but implicitly sought to have the matter decided on merits or by directing the authority to decide the pending representation. The core issue revolved around the procedural remedy available and the stage at which the court should intervene.