HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT TAX No. - 2749 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Shri Ajay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel for the revenue and perused the record. 2. Challenge has been raised to the adjudication order dated 02.01.2025. The writ petition was filed in May, 2025. It has remained pending for more than four months, at fresh stage. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the revenue has raised a preliminary objection that the order impugned is appealable. 4. Objection raised is well founded. The petitioner was noticed. It filed some objections. It has been heard by the Adjudicating Authority before the impugned order came to be passed. 6. In view of the above, no jurisdictional issue or violation of natural justice is seen to exist as may warrant interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, interference claimed is declined. However, since the writ petition has remained pending for almost five months without any fault on the part of the petitioner, it is provided, subject to the petitioner filing such statutory appeal within a period of one month from today, the same may be entertained on its own merits without raising any objection as to limitation. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Yadav, Anshul Kumar Singhal, Ashish Bansal, Shalini Goel Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Mayank Enterprises .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 8. With these observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of. October 9, 2025 Anurag/- WTAX No. 2749 of 2025 2 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad