INDIA HOUSING Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(ALL)-2009-4-466
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 10,2009

INDIA HOUSING THRU PARTNER SHRI I.AHMAD THRU PANKAJ AGNIHOT Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA THRU SECY.FINANCE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)HEARD Sri Akhilesh Kalra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.D. Nag, Senior Counsel for Central Excise & Customs and Service Tax. In the instant writ petition constitutional validity of various provisions of Finance Act, 2007 has been impugned. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that interim orders have been passed by various High Courts of the country. Attention has also been invited towards the order passed by the Bombay High Court. However, Sri K.D. Nag, learned counsel, has invited attention of this Court towards the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.8.2008, operative portion of which is reproduced as under:- "Until further orders, further proceedings in the writ petitions pending before different High Courts shall remain stayed. Dasti service, in addition, is permitted. Tag the petitions with T.P. (C) No.236 of 2007." It has been submitted by Sri Akhilesh Kalra, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court only covers the petitions which are pending and not the matters filed in this Court or other High Courts. On the other hand Sri K.D. Nag, learned counsel, submits that though the writ petition may be filed but this Court cannot adjudicate the matter as the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed the proceedings in letter and spirit. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed the proceedings of all pending writ petitions before different High Court of the country. Though the language of the order is that the proceedings in the pending petitions shall be stayed but letter and spirit of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court is that High Courts should not pass any order till the controversy is adjudicated by the Supreme Court. Though the Bombay High Court has referred the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court but not considered the later part of the order whereby proceedings have been stayed. Ordinarily reference of only pending proceedings does not mean that subsequent petitions filed in the High Courts shall not be covered by the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The direction issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court is binding and we are of the view that it shall cover not only the pending matters but also the subsequent writ petitions filed in this Court or other High Courts. Accordingly, we decline to pass any order unless the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarifies its order dated 18.8.2008. We defer the present writ petition till the controversy is adjudicated by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Four weeks' time is allowed to the learned counsel for the respondents to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks. List thereafter.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.