1. We have heard Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh, the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant and Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned AGP appearing for the respondents.

2. On 15.03.2022 this Court passed the following order:-

“1. We have heard Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents Nos.2 and 3 respectively on an advance copy furnished upon him.

2. It appears from the materials on record that the writ applicant entered into a purchase transaction of HI Crome Scrap with one B. N. Steel Traders, Raipur. While the goods were in transit, the vehicle and the goods came to be intercepted and detained. The goods have been detained essentially on two grounds: (i) Since the goods were dispatched from Raipur, Chhatisgarh to Ahmedabad, State of Gujarat, the transaction could be said to be inter-State transaction and therefore, IGST should have been charged in the tax invoice and not the CGST and SGST; and (ii) in the E-way bill generated for the transaction in question, the place of delivery has been shown as the Dudheshwar, Ahmedabad. While in the tax invoice, the delivery location has been shown as Kubadthal, Daskroi.

3 The matter is at the stage of GST MOV 07.

4 It appears that the writ applicant has also filed a representation dated 9th March 2022 which has been annexed at page : 36 as Annexure : F pointing out that there is a clerical error in the invoice and as regards the discrepancy in the place of delivery, it has been pointed out that the writ applicant has two registered place in the GST. One is the principal place and the other one is additional place. It appears that although the representation is of 9th March 2022, the State Tax Officer has not yet looked into it and has not taken an appropriate decision.

5 Let Notice be issued to the respondents, returnable on 17th March 2022. No Notice now be issued by the Registry to the respondents Nos.2 and 3 as Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned A.G.P. has already entered his appearance on behalf of the respondents. Mr. Sharma is requested to take instructions in the matter and revert to us on 17th March 2022. 6 On the next date of hearing, notify this matter on top of the Board.”

3. Today when the matter was taken up for further hearing, Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned AGP made a statement that the goods and the conveyance have been released.

4. Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh, the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant confirms that the goods and the conveyance have been released. However, Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh has a serious grievance to redress. She submitted that for no good reason, the goods and the conveyance were kept under detention for almost a period of 12 days and her client had to pay an amount of ₹ 65,000/- towards the demurrage charges to the transporter. The grievance of Ms. Parikh is well founded and is a matter of concern.

5. Since the goods and the conveyance have already been released, no further adjudication of the present writ-application is required. This writ-application is accordingly disposed of.