M/S Maa Mani Iron And Steel Co. vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. This decision was based on the submission made by the petitioner's counsel that the petitioner had availed the one-time settlement scheme and that their grievance had been redressed. The State/respondents did not contest this submission. Consequently, the Court found no further purpose in continuing the writ proceedings. The ratio decidendi is that if a petitioner's grievance is resolved through an alternative statutory remedy or scheme after filing a writ petition, the writ petition becomes infructuous and should be dismissed on that ground. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Maa Mani Iron And Steel Co., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The petition was filed against the State of Chhattisgarh and the Joint Commissioner of Chhattisgarh State Tax (GST). The specific tax period and the order or action under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner approached the High Court via a writ petition. The core of the matter, as presented in the order, is the petitioner's subsequent action.

Key Issues

The primary issue before the Court was whether the writ petition had become infructuous. The petitioner argued that they had availed the remedy of a one-time settlement scheme, which had redressed their grievance. The State/respondents did not oppose this submission. The Court was therefore tasked with deciding if the petitioner's subsequent action rendered the writ petition moot. The question of law revolves around the consequence of a petitioner resolving their grievance through an alternative mechanism after initiating writ proceedings.