Royal Electricals v. The Union Of India Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue And ORS

1/2 430-WP-702-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Digitally signed by PURTI PRASAD PARAB Date:

2022.11.16 18:04:49 +0530 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PURTI PRASAD PARAB WRIT PETITION NO. 702 OF 2022 Royal Electricals ....Petitioner V/s.

The Union of India and Ors.

...Respondents

---- Mr. Shankargouda Patil for Petitioner.

Ms. Maya Majumdar for Respondents.

---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & ARIF S. DOCTOR, JJ.

DATED : 15th NOVEMBER 2022 P.C. :

1.

Petitioner is impugning Form No.3 i.e., issued under Sabka Vishwas - (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS) on the ground that respondents have issued Form No.3 without verifying records and without giving personal hearing.

2.

Petitioner had filed Form No.1 under SVLDRS scheme on 31st December 2019. Form No.2 was issued by department on 4th March 2020. Petitioner sought extension for personal hearing which was rescheduled on 18th March 2020. It is petitioner's case that petitioner was unable to attend the personal hearing because petitioner was not allowed to enter the office premises of the Commissioner. Petitioner has recorded the same in the email dated 18th March 2020 to which there is no denial. Purti Parab

2/2 430-WP-702-2022.doc 3.

The undisputed fact is Form No.3 was issued to petitioner on 8th May 2020. The SVLDRS scheme itself come to an end, Ms. Majumdar states on 30th June 2020. Mr. Patil states that payment date was extended till 30th September 2020. The petition itself has been lodged on 30th August 2021 even though it was verified on 30th July 2021. Therefore, there has been inordinate delay even in approaching this court. The designated committee under SVLDRS scheme has been disbanded.

4.

At this stage, Mr. Patil states that it was during covid time. We will have to note that even during those time this court was also functioning and whole country was also functioning. Petitioner was duty bound to explain in the petition reason for approaching late. There is no explanation whatsoever which also create doubt about petitioner's bonafides. 5.

In the circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain the petition.

6.

Petition dismissed.

(A.S. DOCTOR, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Purti Parab