1 2025:CGHC:25559 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3013 of 2025 Sheikh Jameel S/o Late Shri Sheikh Nabi Aged About 64 Years R/o Tikrapara, Ramsagarpara, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Commercial Tax (Excise) Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Dhamtari, Collectorate Dhamtari (C.G.) 3 - District Excise Officer Dhamtari, Office Of The D.E.O. Dhamtari (C.G.) 4 - Chhattisgarh State Marketing Society Limited Through Manager, Office Of The C.S.M.C.L., Dhamtari (C.G.) 5 - Joint Managing Director C.S.M.C.L., C.G., Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Finance Deputy Commissioner C.S.M.C.L., Excise Building, Chhokra Nala, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Excise Commissioner G.S.T. Building, Sector- 19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Birtharey, Advocate. For Respondent -State : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. AG. For Respondent No.4 to 6 : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 19.06.2025 2 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition with following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature including the writ in the nature of mandamus, thereby commanding the respondent authorities to reconsider the claim of petitioner on submission of proof of payment of GST by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law at the earliest. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider and appreciate the evidence led by the petitioner regarding payment of GST for the period of work from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2019 in its true and proper perspective. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records of the case and grant any other relief deemed fit and appropriate in the case.” 2. Vide order dated 29.08.2024 in WPC No.342/2022, this Court has passed the following order: “8. Considering the nature of dispute in this petition, submission of counsel for respondent and the fact that petitioner has not placed on record showing payment of GST for the period of work from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2019, I do not find any merit in this petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed. However, petitioner would be at liberty to submit proof of payment of GST for the period from 01.04.2018 till 31.03.2019 before respondents No.1, 2 and 5 and if such proof of payment of GST is submitted by petitioner, respondents No.1, 2 and 5 shall reconsider the claim of petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 3 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of.” 3. Learned counsel counsel for petitioner contended that on 22.05.2018, petitioner has already paid the GST total Rs.66,984/-, he has also placed on record note-sheet dated 10.10.2018 (Annexure P-5) obtained under Right to Information Act (RTI) which shows that the Excise Officer on 10.11.2018 written note (proposed) that Rs.10,13,314/- could be paid to the transporter (petitioner/Sheikh Jameel). Learned Counsel further contended that pursuant to order of this Court dated 29.08.2024, petitioner has filed the claim application alongwith proof of payment of GST vide Annexure P-3 before the respondent-authority concerned, but till claim of petitioner has not been considered and decided. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents contended that it is not proved that on 22.05.2018 amount of Rs.66,984/- has been paid by the petitioner towards the GST for the period from ‘01.04.2018 to 31.03.2019’ for the transporter work. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Be that as it may, when petitioner has filed the documents in relation to payment of GST, respondent-authority concerned bound to consider the claim of petitioner and to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.4 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner expeditiously in an objective manner. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-