Facts of the Case

The twelve petitioners, led by Rajib Kumar Dholua and all residents of Dibrugarh district, Assam, had filed WP(C)/7613/2018 before the Gauhati High Court against the Union of India and the GST authorities, including the Chief Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax (Central) and Customs, Shillong Zone, and the Commissioner, Joint Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of GST, Dibrugarh. The order under review does not set out the substantive relief originally claimed in the writ petition. What is on record is that, at an earlier stage, an interim order of status quo was operating in the matter, but that interim order had already been vacated by the Court on 04.09.2019 in IA(C) No. 611/2019. When the case was taken up on 12.12.2023, the Court heard Mr. S. N. Tamuli, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel for the GST authorities.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ petition survived for adjudication once the interim order of status quo, which was the basis of the earlier submissions, had already been vacated.
  2. Whether, in the absence of any surviving interim protection, the petition could be treated as infructuous and closed without adjudication on merits.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Mr. Tamuli submitted that although it had earlier been represented to the Court on 06.12.2023 that service was yet to be completed and that an interim order of status quo was operating, that stay had, in fact, already been vacated by the Court's order dated 04.09.2019 in IA(C) No. 611/2019.
  • Counsel further submitted that, in view of the vacation of the interim order, nothing survived to be adjudicated in the present writ petition and that the petition had become infructuous.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The order records that Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel for the GST authorities, was heard, but does not attribute any specific submissions to the respondents beyond this; no contest to the petitioner's statement regarding infructuousness is recorded in the text.

Court Order/Findings

  • The Court took note of the petitioner's counsel's submission that the interim order of status quo had already stood vacated by the order dated 04.09.2019 passed in IA(C) No. 611/2019.
  • Accepting this submission, the Court held that nothing survived to be adjudicated in the writ petition.
  • The writ petition was accordingly closed as infructuous, with no findings recorded on the merits of the underlying dispute.

Important Clarification

  • This order does not decide any substantive question of GST law; it disposes of the writ petition purely on the procedural ground that it had become infructuous following the vacation of the interim relief that had kept the litigation alive.
  • Where a writ petition's continued relevance depends on an interim order, and that interim order stands vacated with the petitioner's counsel not pressing the matter further on merits, the Court may close the petition as infructuous without adjudicating the underlying grievance.

Sections Involved

  • No specific provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 or any other statute were referred to, discussed, or relied upon in this order; the order is confined to closing the writ petition as infructuous.

Decision – In Favour of

Neither party in substantive terms — the writ petition was closed as infructuous on the petitioner's own submission, without any adjudication on the merits of the dispute against the GST authorities.

Related Case Laws

As this order does not lay down any substantive ratio on GST law and closes the matter purely on procedural grounds of infructuousness, no directly on-point related case laws from this site are cited here.

Case Details

  • Court: Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)
  • Case No.: WP(C)/7613/2018
  • CNR: GAHC010245382018
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Dev Choudhury
  • Date of Order: 12.12.2023
  • Parties: Rajib Kumar Dholua & Ors. vs Union of India & Ors.
  • Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. S. N. Tamuli
  • Advocate for Respondent: Assistant Solicitor General of India (represented by Mr. S. C. Keyal, Standing Counsel, GST)

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.