[2025:RJ-JP:7425-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11290/2009 M/s Hindustan Sales Corporation, A proprietorship firm, resident of at 144 B, Saket Colony, Vijay Badi, Path No.7, Sikar Road, Jaipur through its Proprietor Chand Mal Sancheti S/o Shri M.L. Sancheti, aged 42 years. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through its Principal Secretary, Finance, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Janpath, Jaipur. 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Kar Bhawan, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur. 3. Deputy Commissioner (Administration)-I, Commercial Taxes, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur. Heading Commercial Circle, Circle-E and K, Jaipur. 4. Shri Ram Swaroop Sharma S/o Shri Govind Narain Sharma, C-182, Kardhani, Govindpura, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ran Vijay Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kartikeya Sharma for Mr. Sandeep Taneja, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 19/02/2025 1. Learned counsel for the parties are at ad idem that similar connected matters were disposed of on 29.10.2009 holding that no grievance survives by passing the following order:- ‘As all these writ petitions involve identical question of law and fact, and therefore, the same are decided by this common order. Challenge in these petitions have been made to the notification [2025:RJ-JP:7425-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-11290/2009] dated 13.2.07 (Annex.2) whereby inclusion of iron scrap, at Serial No.10 has been made under the provisions of Section 2(8) of the Act. Therefore, it has been prayed that the said notification be quashed and set aside. At the very outset, the learned Advocate-General has submitted that the collection of tax by the contractor is not be made from a registered dealer. Further, he has submitted that this aspect of the matter is clearly revealed from the tender notice dated 7th August, 2009 (Annex.4) wherein clause 35 states that the contract is to collect tax from unregistered dealers. In view of the aforesaid submissions made and the stand taken on behalf of the respondent- State and the fact that the petitioners are registered dealers, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present matters, as the impugned notification does not affect the present petitioners and therefore, their grievance does not survive. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of. 2. This petition is disposed of as infructuous. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J RIYA/ AARZOO ARORA /4