Harphool Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-13258-2026 Date of Decision: 30.04.2026 HARPHOOL SINGH AND ANOTHER

...Petitioners

Vs.

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Mahir Sood, Advocate for Mr. G.S. Ghuman, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Neha Sonawane, DAG Punjab *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioners through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking direction to respondents to restore/unlock their user IDs. They are also seeking direction to respondent No.4 & 6 to furnish status report with detailed criteria as to how a third party can obtain access to confidential/secret GST data of their assessee.

2.

The petitioners are engaged in the business of manufacturing combines. Petitioner No.1 had purchased a piece of land adjoining the land of brother-in-law of respondent No.7 with whom he had some dispute. Respondent No.7 is having enmity with the petitioners as petitioner No.2 was in support of petitioner No.1. Respondent No.7 filed multiple complaints before authorities against the petitioners. Respondent No.7 filed complaints dated 10.01.2026 and 27.01.2025 against petitioners before authorities alleging violation of Central Motor Vehicle Rules and misrepresentation of engine numbers of the combines. The respondentDEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.04.30 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-13258-2026 -2Transport Department on the basis of said complaint blocked their online E-Portal IDs. The respondent-GST asked respondent No.7 to disclose the source from where he had obtained the data shared with the respondenttransport department. The respondent No.7 vide reply dated 24.03.2026 denied sharing of any information. Continuous blockage of the petitioners' accounts would result in substantial loss of revenue to them as well as state exchequer.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent has blocked their user IDs without passing any order. They have not been given opportunity of hearing.

4.

Learned State counsel submits that petitioners were served show cause notice. On being asked, she concedes that till date no order has been passed, however, assures the Court that speaking order would be passed after granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a week from today.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners agrees to the aforesaid arrangement.

6.

In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands disposed of. It is made clear that competent authority shall pass speaking orders after granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. They at the first instance shall appear before respondent No.3 on 04.05.2026 at 11:00AM and thereafter as directed by said authority. 7.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE April 30, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.04.30 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document