Heard Ms. Anjali Jha, along with Sri Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 2 to 5, Sri Prashant Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party No.6 and Ms. Veena Raje, learned counsel for Union of India.

The petitioner has challenged herein the order dated 03.02.2021 passed by Deputy Director, Agra Regional Unit (Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Agra Regional Unit), freezing account of the petitioner in exercise of power under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that Deputy Director not being of the rank of Commissioner did not have jurisdiction to pass such an order or issue such communication. However, learned counsel for the opposite parties informs the Court that this very order was the subject matter of the challenge by this very petitioner before Supreme Court of India in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 202 of 2021 and the said petition was dismissed with the observation that ” we find no ground to entertain these matters” and cost of ₹ 50,000/- was imposed on each of the petitioners, therefore, now it is not open for the petitioner to seek the same relief before this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Having considered the facts of the case and submissions made, especially the filing of a writ petition by the petitioner before Supreme Court of India, as noticed herein above, seeking same relief as prayed herein and also the fact that subsequent to issuance of the communication dated 03.02.2021, impugned herein, another order dated 25.02.2021 has been passed by the Additional Director, freezing the same account, as such, communication impugned herein, even otherwise has outlived its utility, we do not find any reason to entertain this writ petition.

We, accordingly, dismiss it with these observations, however, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner, if any, to challenge the subsequent orders passed by Additional Director freezing its account, unless there is some other legal impediment in this regard especially in view of the rejection of petitioner’s writ petition by the Supreme Court of India as already referred.