High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Shivaji Pandey v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT TAX No. 574 of 2006  RD-AH 6903 (29 March 2006)
Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli, J.
Hon'ble Vikram Nath, J.
The penalty order is Annexure-1 to this writ petition. Pursuant to which a citation has been issued for recovery. A copy of citation is annexed as Annexure-10 to this writ petition.
According to the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner a revision is already pending against the penalty order. This writ petition has been filed merely for quashing of the recovery order without challenging the penalty order. Thus, this is a parallel proceeding, which cannot be entertained due to the reason given below.
It is obvious that if the revision was to be dismissed and the penalty orders were to be maintained, quashing of the recovery would create an anomalous situation where the demand would remain standing but in its enforcement and recovery would be quashed in these parallel proceedings. This cannot be done.
In the circumstances, the proper remedy would be to apply for a stay order in the pending revision and not filing parallel writ petition, without questioning the penalty order.
The writ petition is totally misconceived. It is accordingly dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.