On oral prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is permitted to implead the Assistant Engineer (A.E.), Central GST, Meerut as respondent no.3 during course of the day.

Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Agarawal, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 & 3.

The instant petition has been filed with the following prayer:

a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to respondent no.1 to supply of documents mentioned in Annexure-A of Panchnama dated 14.1.2021 at Serial No.1 to 16 and Serial No.18 to the petitioner for statutory compliances.

b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to set aside the attachment of the bank account no.158705500591, ICICI BANK, A-17, Gandhi Nagar, Rampur Road, Moradabad, UP-24001 of M/s Wave Agro Oils.

c) Issue direction to return amount of ₹ 14,99,552/- illegally taken by the respondent Department.

At present, so far as prayer ‘a’ is concerned, we find that the representation made by the petitioner is already pending before respondent no.3.

So far as the second prayer is concerned, that has been made to challenge the attachment of the petitioner’s bank account no.158705500591, ICICI BANK, A-17, Gandhi Nagar, Rampur Road, Moradabad, UP-24001 of M/s Wave Agro Oils, we find that the said attachment order dated 14.1.2021 was passed on the date on which a search was carried out at the premises of the petitioner under Section 67 of the Central, GST, 2017. Therefore, there was no inherent lack of jurisdiction in issuing the attachment order.

As to the further submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that opportunity of hearing has been denied, we find that post decisional hearing was to be afforded by respondent no.3 after it had issued, the attachment order dated 14.1.2021 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition). In that regard, the petitioner has already filed a written objection dated 25.3.2021. That was received by respondent no.3 on 1.4.2021.

Similarly, petitioner’s representation for refund of cash seized, is also pending before respondent no.3.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petition pending or calling for a counter affidavit, at this stage.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no.3 to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the petitioner’s objection dated 25.3.2021, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks from today, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.