Sr. No.02 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU (Through VC) WP(C) 2941/2024 M/S BATRA BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED TH AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY DAVINDER KUMAR BATRA …Petitioner(s)/appellant(s) Through: Mr. Subodh Singh Jamwal, Advocate Vs. UT OF LADAKH TH THE COMMISSIONER STATE TAXES DEPT AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE O R D E R 14-05-2025 1. Petitioner (M/s Batra Brother Private Limited) has prayed for the following substantive reliefs: 1. Certiorari whereby quashing the Order No. ZD380722000063W dated 13-07-2022 whereby the vehicle and goods of the petitioner concern were detained and order of demand of tax and penalty to the tune of Rs. 13,69,748/- was issued on the same day i.e. 13.07.2022 and was imposed without giving opportunity of proper hearing and contrary to the principles of natural justice and being without jurisdiction and contrary to law and the provisions of the GST Act and the complete proceedings relating to seizure of goods and vehicle are illegal and unjustified and the appeal filed by the petitioner is also not being considered and disposed despite directions of the Hon'ble High Court D.B. To do so vide its order dated 15-09-2023; 2. For writ of mandamus whereby directing the respondent no. 03 to release the goods seized in terms of its orders dated 13-07-2023” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aggrieved by the order dated 13.07.2022, whereby the vehicle as also the goods of the petitioner were detained, the petitioner had preferred a statutory appeal Junaid Ayoub I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document before the competent authority on 26.07.2022 and had deposited 25% of the amount of penalty by way of pre-deposit. 3. He submits that, vide an independent application, the petitioner had also prayed for release of the articles/merchandise. But even though years have rolled by but to date neither the appeal nor the application moved by the petitioner has been decided. As a result, he asserts that rights/interests of the petitioner are severely impaired. 4. Notice of this petition was issued to the respondents but despite repeated opportunities, no response has been submitted. However, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the matter is now listed before the appellate authority on 22.05.2025. And it is submitted that every possible endeavor shall be made by the appellate authority to consider and decide the appeal as also the application, referred to above, on the date fixed. 5. At any rate, he submits that if for any unforeseeable circumstances, the matter is not heard and decided on the date fixed, at best, the appeal as also the application moved by the petitioner shall be finally disposed of within two weeks’ thereafter. 6. In the wake of the above and, particularly, the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents, we refrain ourselves from passing any formal order/directions at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in terms of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents. However, in the event the matter is not decided as indicated above, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application in this appeal itself for its restoration and necessary orders. (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE SRINAGAR 14-05-2025 Junaid Junaid Ayoub I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document