1. We have heard Mr. Pavan Agrawal, the learned counsel assisted by Mr. Rahul L. Gajera, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Jaimin Gandhi, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. On 08.01.2021, this Court passed the following order :

“We have heard Mr. Pawan C. Agrawal, the learned counsel assisted by Mr. Rahul Gajera, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Jaimin Gandhi, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

Prima facie, we are convinced with the submissions canvassed on behalf of the writ applicant that the impugned order passed by the authority under Section2 9 of the GST Act cancelling the GST Registration was without giving any opportunity of hearing to the writ applicant. Prima facie the show cause notice itself reflects complete non-application of mind. Prima facie, we are of the view that we should remit this matter to the authority so as to give the writ applicant an opportunity of hearing. In such circumstances, we have asked Mr. Gandhi to speak to the authority concerned whether he would be willing to recall or withdraw the matter so as to give an opportunity of hearing to the writ applicant and thereafter pass a fresh reasoned order.

Post this matter on 12.01.2021 as Item No.1 on the board.

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION:

The Civil Application stands disposed of.”

3. Today, when the matter is taken up for further hearing, Mr. Gandhi, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that Mr. A.K.Singh, Superintendent is sitting next to him for the purpose of instructions. Mr. Gandhi would submit that he has discussed the matter with Mr. A.K.Singh. Mr. Gandhi has a very fair proposal to put forward before this Court, so as to bring to an end this litigation. Mr. Gandhi accepts that there are discrepancies in the notice as at that point of time, there was some problem with the portal. He suggested that, let the writ applicant file an application under Section 30 of the CGST Act for the revocation of cancellation of registration. He would submit that, once such an application is filed, the authority concerned shall pass an appropriate order recalling the impugned order in the case at hand.

4. In view of the aforesaid statement made by Mr. Gandhi, we dispose of this writ application asking the writ applicant to prefer an application under Section 30 of the CGST Act at the earliest. Once such application is filed, the authority concerned shall pass appropriate order within 3 (three) days in accordance with the statement made by Mr. Gandhi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

5. With the above, this writ application stands disposed of.