Case Law Details
Sri Nayaz Ahmed Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court)
State counsel to accept notice for respondents.
2. In the instant petition, the petitioner has sought for quashing the Order, dated 4-2-2019 vide Annexure-C, passed under section 83(1) read with section 5(3) of Karnataka Goods and Services Act of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
3. Petitioner has a remedy of an appeal as provided under section 107 of the Act, which has not been exhausted. On the other hand, in the writ petition the petitioner has stated as follows :–
“It is submitted that, the petitioner has no other efficacious and alternate remedy except to file the present writ petition and he has not filed any other writ petition on the same cause of action in any other court of law.”
4. The petitioner has not approached this Court with clear picture, whether he had option to file appeal or not, having regard to section 107 of the Act. The petitioner is relegated to the Appellate Authority. The petitioner is permitted to file appeal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order along with application for con-donation of delay, if any. In such an event, the Appellate Authority is hereby directed to examine the petitioner’s grievance at the earliest.
5. With the above observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
