Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/1151/2021 on 23 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
ON THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2021
BEFORE:
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
WRIT PETITION (M/S) No. 1151 of 2021
BETWEEN:
Subhash Singh Kutiyal. ....Petitioner
(By Mr. Kurban Ali, Advocate)
AND:
State of Uttarakhand
and others. ...Respondents
(By Mr. Vinod Nautiyal, Deputy Advocate General for the
State of Uttarakhand)
JUDGMENT
By means of this writ petition, petitioner
has sought the following reliefs:
"i) Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature of certiorari to quash the order
dated 22-9-2019 passed by the
commissioner Excise, Dehradun for the
direction to deposit 25% of total
amount of recovery (annexed as
Annexure no. 9).
ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing the
respondents to grant waiver to the
petitioner in the light of section 11 (2)
(iii) of U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and to
hear and decide the revision of the
petitioner on its own merit.
iii) Issue a writ order or direction to
the concerned respondents not to use
any corrosive measure for the
recovery of money on the basis of the
order passed by the excise
commissioner Dehradun/District Excise
Officer Pithoragarh during the
pendency of the writ petition."
2. According to the petitioner, against the
order passed by District Excise Officer, Pithoragarh on
02.05.2018, petitioner had filed an Appeal, which was
dismissed. Against dismissal of Appeal by the Excise
Commissioner, petitioner has filed a Revision, which is
pending before the State Government.
3. According to learned counsel for the
petitioner, petitioner had moved an application under
3rd proviso to Section 11 (2) of U.P. Excise Act for
waiver of the condition regarding pre-deposit of the
amount; but, no decision has been taken on such
application.
4. 3rd proviso to Section 11 (2) of Excise Act is
reproduced below:
"Provided also that the State
Government may, for reasons to be
recorded in writing wave, or relax the
requirement of preceding proviso in
respect of such disputed amount of
tax, fees, penalty or other dues."
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that petitioner's stay application is also
pending consideration before the Revisional Authority,
however, Tehsildar, Pithoragarh has now issued a
recovery citation for recovery of ` 33,39,346/- against
the petitioner.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
referred to one order passed by Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court on 05.03.2021 in WPMS No. 1923 of 2020,
whereby a direction was issued to the State
Government to consider petitioner's application for
waiver from condition of pre-deposit within one month
from the date of production of certified copy of the
order. He further submits that petitioner's application
has not been decided by the State Government so far.
7. Learned Deputy Advocate General assures
the Court that petitioner's application seeking waiver
under 3rd proviso to Section 11 (2) of Excise Act
would be considered within four weeks, if not already
considered.
8. In view of the assurance given by learned
Deputy Advocate General, the writ petition is disposed
of with a direction to Revisional Authority to consider
and decide petitioner's application seeking waiver
under 3rd proviso to Section 11 (2) of Excise Act as
early as possible; but not later than four weeks from
the date of production of certified copy of this order.
9. For a period of four weeks or till decision on
petitioner's application seeking waiver is taken, no
recovery shall be made from the petitioner.
10. Let a certified copy of this order be issued
within 24 hours.
(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.)
Arpan
