Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 72237 (BOM)

SHRI. VILAS SHIVAJI PATIL v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS GST DEPT. AND ORS

PIL/46/2022 · 2025-11-20

Shri Ajit B Kadethankar, Shri M S Karnik

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

14-PIL-46-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 46 OF 2022 Shri. Vilas Shivaji Patil … Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra And Ors … Respondents —————— None for the Petitioner. Ms. Neha Bhide, GP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4-State. —————— Coram : M. S. Karnik & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ. Date : November 20, 2025. P. C. : 1. With the assistance of Ms. Neha Bhide, learned Government Pleader, we have gone through the memo of the PIL and the relevant exhibits. 2. The Petitioner seeks a direction to the Respondent No. 4- Assistant Commissioner for GST, Solapur to recover the outstanding dues with Respondent No. 5-Sugar Factory which is pending since 2018. The Petitioner is a share holder of the Respondent No. 5-Sugar Factory. The grievance is that the sugar factory has been unnecessarily bearing Shubham Talle 1 of 2 TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO Digitally signed by TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO Date: 2025.11.21 13:39:16 +0530 14-PIL-46-2022.doc the burden of interest on payment of charges on dues of GST amount. 3. It is open for the Petitioner, to approach the Respondent No. 4- Assistant Commissioner for GST, Solapur by making an appropriate representation bringing to notice the concern raised in this PIL. 4. We noticed that the Petitioner iled representation dated 26th February 2021 which is at page no. 33 to the Respondent No. 4- Assistant Commissioner for GST, Solapur for taking appropriate action. He has been informed by the Respondent No. 4-Assistant Commissioner for GST, Solapur that the necessary recovery action has been initiated against the sugar factory. In this view of the matter, the same obviously will be taken to its logical conclusion in accordance with the law. The cause for which the Petition is iled does not survive and hence, the same stands disposed of. 5. Parties are at liberty to apply, in case of any diiculty. 6. Public Interest Litigation is disposed of. [ Ajit B. Kadethankar, J. ] [ M. S. Karnik, J. ] Shubham Talle 2 of 2