Jai Maa Durga & Co. Vs Principal Commissioner (Jharkhand High Court)
Summary: The Jharkhand High Court considered a writ petition filed by M/s Jai Maa Durga & Co., a proprietorship concern founded by Late Deen Dayal Singh, through his legal heir Santosh Kumar. The petitioner challenged orders dated 05.12.2023 and 25.08.2025 passed by the original and appellate authorities respectively, concerning the proprietary concern, even though the proprietor had died on 17.01.2019.
The petitioner contended that the respondents were aware of the proprietor’s death, relying upon documents annexed with the writ petition. It was also pointed out that the petitioner, as legal representative of Late Deen Dayal Singh, had applied for cancellation of the GST registration on 23.09.2021 and had submitted the death certificate along with that application.
The petitioner relied upon the Jharkhand High Court’s judgment and order dated 11.06.2026 in W.P.(T) No. 3862 of 2026, M/s S.B. Enterprises vs. Directorate General of GST Intelligence & anr., where, in similar circumstances, orders made against a deceased proprietor had been quashed and set aside, while leaving it open to the respondents to take appropriate steps in accordance with law against the legal representative.
The High Court noted that the original order had been passed on 05.12.2023 and upheld by the appellate authority on 25.08.2025. Importantly, the appellate authority had accepted both the fact of death and its communication to the department. The Court further noted the petitioner’s application dated 23.09.2021 for cancellation of GST registration and the accompanying death certificate.
The Court held that it is well settled that an order made against a dead person is a nullity. The decision in M/s S.B. Enterprises was found to support the petitioner’s case.
Consequently, the High Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated 05.12.2023 and 25.08.2025. However, the Court expressly left it open to the respondents to take such steps as they may be advised and in accordance with law to pursue their claims against the petitioner. The petition was therefore disposed of on those terms, the Rule was made absolute, and no order was made as to costs.
Cases Discussed:
- M/s S.B. Enterprises Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence (Jharkhand High Court), W.P.(T) No. 3862 of 2026, judgment and order dated 11.06.2026 — Relied upon. In similar circumstances, the High Court quashed orders made against a deceased proprietor while leaving the Department at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law against the legal representative.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
1. Heard Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Rule. The rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petitioner, inter alia, challenges the orders dated 05.12.2023 and 25.08.2025 passed by the original and appellate authority, respectively, against M/S Jai Maa Durga & Co., a proprietary concern of late Deen Dayal Singh, much after the proprietor died on 17.01.2019.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the demise of late Deen Dayal Singh was known to the respondents, as evidenced by Annexures 1 and 2 annexed to this petition. He relied on this Court’s judgment and order dated 11.06.2026 in W.P.(T) No. 3862 of 2026 (M/s S.B. Enterprises Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence & Anr.) in which, under similar circumstances, impugned orders made against the dead proprietor were quashed and set aside, leaving it open to the respondents to take such steps as he may be advised in accordance with law to pursue their claims against the petitioner, who was the legal representative of the deceased proprietor in the said matter.
5. The impugned order in this case was passed on 05.12.2023 by the original authority and was upheld by the appellate authority vide order dated 25.08.2025. The appellate authority has accepted the fact of death and its communication to the department. Even otherwise, the petitioner, as the legal representative of Late Deen Dayal Singh, by his application dated 23.09.2021, sought cancellation of GST registration and, along with this application, submitted the death certificate of Late Deen Dayal Singh.
6. It is well settled that the order made against a dead person would be a nullity. The decision in M/s. S.B. Enterprises (Supra) also supports the petitioner’s case.
7. Accordingly, we quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 05.12.2023 (Annexure-3) and 25.08.2025 (Annexure-4). However, we leave it open to the respondents to take such steps as they may be advised and in accordance with law to pursue their claims against the petitioner herein.
8. The petition is disposed of by quashing the above-referred impugned orders and by granting the respondents the above-referred liberty, which is to be exercised in terms of the law.
9. The Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
10. The petition is disposed of without any orders for costs.
