( 2025:HHC:33762 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.15550 of 2025 Date of decision: 25.09.2025 Navjot Saini ….Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. ….Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Sakshi Gautam, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anshul Attri, Central Government Counsel, for respondent No.1. Mr. Neeraj Sharma and Mr. Ishan Kashyap, Advocates, for respondents No.2 & 3. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge(Oral): Notice. Mr. Anshul Attri, learned CGC and Mr.Neeraj Sharma, learned Advocate, appear, waive and accept notice on behalf of the respective respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief:- “(a) That Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ in the nature certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 28.03.2025 under Section 147 read with Section 144 (Annexure P-1) for assessment year 2020-21 passed in furtherance to the notice issued under Section 148 (Annexure P-2) being illegal and without jurisdiction and in violation to the procedure of law and without proper and legal sanction. ” 3. The subject matter of the challenge in this petition, whereby the legality, validity and propriety of impugned notice under Section 148, 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2 ( 2025:HHC:33762 ) dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-2) is already under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (c) No. 17040/2024, titled as The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Another Vs. M/s Dr. Reddy Laboratories Ltd. with connected matters. 4. Since the issue involved in this petition is already pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, therefore, keeping in view the judicial discipline, we refrain ourselves from giving our opinion with respect to impugned notice under Section 148, dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-2), as assailed in this petition. We direct that the present petition shall be governed by the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the decision thereto, shall be binding on this case also. 5. The continuity of proceedings before the competent authority, in view of the pendency of the matter before the Hon’ble Supreme Court is bound to lead to multiplicity of litigation. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to stay such proceedings till the time issue is finally decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ordered accordingly. 6. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. ( Vivek Singh Thakur ) Judge ( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge September 25, 2025 (reena)