IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(T) No. 6103 of 2022

M/s ESL Steel Limited (earlier known as Electrosteel

Steels Limited) having its registered office at Kanke, Ranchi

and its principal place of business at Bokaro through its

Deputy General Manager (Accounts) Rajesh Kumar Pandey,

R/o Bokaro

--- --- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Jharkhand, Ministry of Finance, Dhurwa, Ranchi through

its Secretary.

2. Commissioner of State Tax, State Taxes Dept., Ranchi

3. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Bokaro Circle, Bokaro

--- --- Respondents

…....

CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

For the Petitioner : M/s Biren Poddar, Sr. Adv., Deepak Kr. Sinha,

Piyush Poddar, Rakhi Sharma, Manav Poddar, Advs.

For the Respondents : M/s Sachin Kumar, A.A.G-II, Deepak Kr. Dubey, A.C.

04/25.01.2023

The writ petition was preferred for the following reliefs:

a) “For a direction upon the Respondent No. 2 i.e. the

Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi

to immediately pass order and dispose of the revision

petition being Revision Case No. CC(S) 310 of 2020,

filed by the Petitioner for the period 2016-17 (VAT)

under Section 80(4) of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax

Act, 2005, challenging the Assessment Order dated

20.01.2020 passed by the Respondent No. 3, which

revision petition has already been heard by the said

Revisional Authority (Respondent No.2) as back as on

04.03.2022 (Annexure-2), but even after expiry of more

than 6 months from the date of conclusion of final

hearing, no order has been passed on the aforesaid

revision petition, despite making application dated

16.09.2022 (Annexure-3) for passing of an order over the

same at the earliest.

b) For any other appropriate Writ(s), Order(s), Direction(s)

as may be deemed fit and proper by your Lordships for

doing substantial and conscionable justice to the

petitioner”.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even after expiry

of six months from the date of conclusion of final hearing, the Revision

Case No. CC(S) 310 of 2020 has not been disposed of by the

Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jharkhand, Ranchi-Respondent

no.2. Therefore, petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court.

3.

Learned counsel for the Respondent State submits that the writ

petition may be disposed of at this stage with a simplicitor direction

upon the respondent no.2 to decide the pending revision case in

accordance with law expeditiously.

-2-

4.

Having regard to the nature of relief prayed for, since the Revision

Case No. CC(S) 310 of 2020 is pending before the respondent no.2

Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department,

Ranchi in which, allegedly hearing has been concluded 6 months back,

we deem it proper to direct respondent no.2 Commissioner of

Commercial Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department, Ranchi to dispose of

the Revision Case No. CC(S) 310 of 2020 within a period of 6 weeks

from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if not already decided.

5.

The writ petition is disposed of.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, A.C.J.)

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

A.Mohanty