Facts of the Case

Rajesh Kumar Rout filed a writ petition before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack against the Commissioner of State Tax, Commissionerate of CT & GST, and others, invoking Article 226 of the Constitution in connection with a dispute arising under the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Additional Standing Counsel for the revenue appeared for the opposite parties. The matter, taken up through hybrid mode on 15.11.2023, does not record independent facts, GSTIN, quantum, or procedural history specific to the petitioner; it was disposed of by applying the common order dated 6 November 2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 and connected batch of writ petitions titled M/s. Pravat Kumar Choudhury and Others v. Additional State Tax Officer, CT & GST, Cuttack and Others.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner's grievance against the Commissioner of State Tax, CT & GST, stood covered by the common order passed in the Pravat Kumar Choudhury batch of writ petitions.
  2. What consequential relief, if any, followed for the petitioner upon application of that common order, decided a week earlier, to his facts.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • No independent submissions are separately recorded; the petitioner's counsel appeared, and the matter was treated as governed by the same considerations as the lead batch of writ petitions.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Additional Standing Counsel for the revenue appeared; no independent contest is recorded, the disposal proceeding on the footing of the common order already rendered in the lead matter.

Court Order/Findings

  • The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the common order dated 6 November 2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 and Batch of Writ Petitions (M/s. Pravat Kumar Choudhury and Others v. Additional State Tax Officer, CT & GST, Cuttack and Others).
  • No independent reasoning or relief distinct from the lead order is set out in this short order.

Important Clarification

As with the other connected matters disposed of in the same batch, the substantive reasoning and relief must be located in the lead order in the Pravat Kumar Choudhury batch; this order, taken alone, discloses no independent ratio governing the petitioner's dispute with the State Tax authorities, even though it was passed a week after the lead order.

Sections Involved

  • Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — the substantive statute governing the underlying dispute with the Commissioner of State Tax, CT & GST.
  • Article 226, Constitution of India — the writ jurisdiction invoked by the petitioner.

Decision – In Favour of

The outcome cannot be assessed from this order in isolation, since it simply adopts a common order passed in a separate lead matter without reproducing its reasoning. This is a procedural disposal, not an independent merits decision; the actual holding must be traced to the lead judgment in the Pravat Kumar Choudhury batch of writ petitions decided on 6 November 2023.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack
  • Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 35389 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Acting Chief Justice Dr. B.R. Sarangi and Justice Murahari Sri Raman
  • Decision Date: 15.11.2023
  • Disposal Nature: Disposed of in terms of a common GST order

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (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.