Facts of the Case

  • Filing of the Petition: The petitioner, M/s S And R Erectors—a partnership firm operating from Jaipur, Rajasthan, represented by its partner Rohitash Singh—filed a Division Bench Civil Writ Petition (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6803/2020) before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur.
  • Respondents Impleaded: The petitioner instituted proceedings challenging action/inaction under central legislation by arraying:
    1. Union of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.
    2. The Commissioner, Central GST Commissionerate, Jaipur.
    3. The National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), New Delhi.
  • Procedural Development: During the hearing before the Division Bench on October 12, 2022, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner prayed for leave to withdraw the writ petition. The request was coupled with a specific prayer seeking liberty to revive the petition or approach the court again should an eventuality arise concerning the same underlying cause of action.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the High Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, ought to permit the unconditional or conditional withdrawal of a pending writ petition seeking tax or statutory relief.
  2. Whether the petitioner can be granted reserved liberty to revive the writ proceedings or initiate a fresh legal remedy upon the occurrence of any future contingency or fresh cause of action arising out of the same subject matter.

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The learned counsel representing the petitioner submitted before the Bench that, in view of prevailing procedural developments or potential statutory/administrative alternatives, the petitioner did not wish to press the writ petition at that specific juncture.
  • The counsel specifically prayed that the dismissal of the petition should not operate as a absolute bar (res judicata) against the petitioner.
  • It was urged that the court grant explicit liberty to revive the matter or seek appropriate legal recourse if subsequent events or action by the tax/administrative authorities create a fresh cause of action or necessity for judicial intervention.

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents did not object to the prayer for withdrawal made by the petitioner, provided the petition was disposed of accordingly without expressing any opinion on the merits of the underlying dispute.

Court Order & Findings

  • Bench: Hon'ble The Acting Chief Justice Mr. Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani.
  • Order Passed: The Hon'ble High Court acceded to the request made by the petitioner's counsel.
  • Judicial Observation: The Court held that the petition be dismissed as withdrawn. However, the Bench explicitly protected the petitioner’s legal rights by granting liberty to revive the petition in case an eventuality or necessity arises regarding the same cause of action.

Important Clarification

  • Non-Prejudicial Dismissal: The withdrawal of a writ petition with explicit "liberty to revive" ensures that the dismissal does not preclude the taxpayer from re-approaching the court.
  • Doctrine of Res Judicata Excluded: When a court grants liberty to revive upon withdrawal, the principle of res judicata under civil jurisprudence does not bar the petitioner from seeking constitutional remedies if a fresh grievance or actionable situation arises from the same set of facts.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107 / Section 108 / Section 172 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 (in relation to tax administration, statutory remedies, and administrative directives).
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India (pertaining to the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court).

Link to download the order - https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1784615990_1559compressed.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content.The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.