2025:UHC:9929-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (M/B) No.946 of 2025 11 November, 2025 Sheetal Bhatia ----Petitioner versus State of Uttarakhand & Others ----Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. H.M. Bhatia, learned counsel for the petitioner Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State. ------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Sri G. NARENDAR, C.J.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State. 2. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the instant writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 15.05.2025, rendered by this Court in Writ Petition (M/B) No.176 of 2025. Judgment dated 15.05.2025 is as follows:- “Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State Ms. Puja Banga. 2. The short question involved in this writ petition is correctness of the cancellation of the GST registration. 3. After hearing for some time, learned Brief Holder for the State submits that the petitioner has an 1 2025:UHC:9929-DB alternative remedy under the provisions of Section 30 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), wherein the registered dealer, who has suffered an order of cancellation of the registration, is entitled to make an application under the provisions of Section 30 of the Act to revoke the orders of cancellation of registration. 4. On a query, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that no such application has been preferred by the petitioner. 5. It is seen that the application is required to be made within 90 days. 6. In view of the enforcement of the Act being at the initial stage and various typical aspects of the Act being a little beyond the understanding of a common man, whose prime focus is on running his day to day business, we feel that the limitation should not take precedence for reconsideration of the order of cancellation. The cancellation directly affects the livelihood of the citizen and every cancellation would also have an adverse effect on the revenues of the State, as it is well known that no person can carry-on trade or business as guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, without complying with the restriction of registration. 7. In that view, keeping a larger objective of the involvement of livelihood and also loss of revenue to the Department, we are of the considered opinion that delay in invoking the provisions of Section 30 of the Act is required to be condoned and is, accordingly, condoned. If an application is made by the petitioner under the provisions of Section 30 of the Act within three weeks from today and if such an application is made, the same shall be taken-up for consideration and shall be disposed of within three weeks thereafter. Along with the application, the petitioner shall also file the returns upto the date of cancellation order. 8. The order in appeal dated 29.03.2025 is set aside. 9. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. 10. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.” 2 2025:UHC:9929-DB 3. The submission of both the counsels is placed on record. 4. The instant Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms of judgment dated 15.05.2025 rendered in Writ Petition (M/B) No.176 of 2025. 5. The writ petition stands ordered accordingly. 6. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. (G. NARENDAR, C.J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 11.11.2025 Rajni 3 RAJINI GUSAIN Digitally signed by RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db48448a c3701a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d01342 , postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4DF 4FC80D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A158 A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN Date: 2025.11.15 16:49:56 +05'30'