Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 522 (JK)

Ashok Sharma v. State

2017-08-02

ALOK ARADHE, SANJEEV KUMAR

body2017
JUDGMENT : WPPIL No.15/2016, MP NO.01/2016 Mr. Ashwani Mangotra, Adv vice Mr. Ashok Sharma, petitioner 1. In this public interest litigation, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the SRO No.297 of 2015 dated 02.09.2015 issued by the respondent No.1 by which tax has been imposed on tickets of helicopters operating to carry the pilgrims from Katra to SAnjichhat. 2. When the matter was taken up today, learned senior counsel for the respondent No.4 has produced a copy of order dated 03.07.2017 issued by the Additional Chief Executive Officer of Shri Mata Devi Shrine Board, Katra which is taken on record. It is pointed out that the service tax on the helicopter services has been withdrawn w.e.f. 28.06.2017. 3. In view of the fact that the aforesaid tax has already been withdrawn, we are not inclined to examine the validity of the SRO 297 of 2015, as it is well settled that this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the State Constitution would not examine an academic issue. 4. In view of the subsequent developments which have taken place during the pendency of the public interest litigation, this writ petition, is disposed of. WPPIL No.10/2017, MP NO.01/2017. Mr. Anil Khajuria, Adv for petitioner. 5. In this public interest litigation, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the SRO No.297 of 2015 dated 02.09.2015 issued by the respondent No.1 by which tax has been imposed on tickets of helicopters operating to carry the pilgrims from Katra to SAnjichhat. 6. When the matter was taken up today, learned senior counsel for the respondent No.4 has produced a copy of order dated 03.07.2017 issued by the Additional Chief Executive Officer of Shri Mata Devi Shrine Board, Katra which is taken on record. It is pointed out that the service tax on the helicopter services has been withdrawn w.e.f. 28.06.2017. 7. In view of the fact that the aforesaid tax has already been withdrawn, we are not inclined to examine the validity of the SRO 297 of 2015, as it is well settled that this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the State Constitution would not examine an academic issue. 8. 8. In view of the subsequent developments which have taken place during the pendency of the public interest litigation, this writ petition, is disposed of.