JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent relating to the issuance of the impugned form SVLDRS-3 dated 22.05.2020 and quash after considering the payments already made by the petitioner and issue a Discharge Certificate in form SVLDRS-4 in accordance with SVLDR Scheme 2019 within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.) 1. In the captioned writ petition, Mr. G.Natarajan, learned counsel on record for the sole writ petitioner and Ms.S.Ragaventhre, learned Junior Standing Counsel for Customs and Central Excise on behalf of both the respondents are before me. 2. The common proceedings made in the captioned main writ petition and W.M.P therein i.e., captioned W.M.P of the previous listing on 26.11.2021 reads as follows: 'Captioned main writ petition pertains to 'Sabka Vishwas Legacy Disputes Resolution Scheme, 2019' (hereinafter 'SVLDRS' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity). Mr.G.Natarajan, learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that SVLDRS was introduced vide Chapter V of the Finance Act, 2019 to settle disputes pending at various levels being disputed legacy tax levies and this is owing to the GST (Goods and Services Tax) regime kicking in on and from 01.07.2017. 2. Learned counsel submits that the writ petitioner comes under the category 'Litigation' as appeals were pending as on 30.06.2019. To be noted, this pertains to service tax. Learned counsel submits that the first respondent in the captioned writ petition i.e., 'designated committee' (hereinafter 'said Committee' for the sake of convenience and clarity) issued SVLDRS-2 form to the petitioner on 04.02.2021 wherein the tax dues was mentioned as INR 29,94,239/-. It also shows that the amount already paid by the petitioner as INR 19,19,911/- but the balance has been shown as NIL. Learned counsel submits that in the form instead of showing tax relief under SVLDRS scheme as 70% of tax payable (INR 20,95,967/-) INR 10,74,328/- was mentioned. 3. Writ petitioner took up the matter with the authorities concerned, in the interregnum, the writ petitioner's appeal was disposed of and the matter is now remanded to the second respondent who is in seizin of the issue. 4. Learned counsel submits that the figure of INR 19,19,911/- being the tax paid by the writ petitioner has not been disputed and this is also reflected in SVLDRS-3 form. 4. Learned counsel submits that the figure of INR 19,19,911/- being the tax paid by the writ petitioner has not been disputed and this is also reflected in SVLDRS-3 form. Only with regard to actual tax relief, an error appears to have crept in. Learned counsel submits that this is more in the nature of an inadvertent technical/technological/secretarial error. Notwithstanding this SVLDRS-3 form has been erroneously issued saying there is 30% tax balance. 5. It is further say of learned counsel that if the above error is recitified, the writ petitioner will be entitled to a discharge certificate which this Court is informed is SVLDRS-4. 6. Ms.Ragaventhre, learned Junior standing Counsel for Customs and Central Excise who accepts notice on behalf of both the respondents requests for two weeks time to get instructions and revert to this Court. 7. This Court finds that there is a prima facie case to issue notice regarding admission. However as the Revenue counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents has sought time to get instructions, if the second respondent concludes the remanded proceedings in the interregnum, it can lead to an irreversible situation and therefore, the proceedings before the second respondent vide C.No.V/ST/15/63/2015-Adjn dated 12.11.2021 (De novo adjudication) shall be kept in abeyance and remain stayed till next listing. 8. List under the caption 'NOTICE REGARDING ADMISSION' in the next listing. Registry to show the name of Revenue counsel in the cause list. 9. List on 10.02.2022.' 3. In continuation of the aforementioned proceedings, learned Revenue counsel has today filed a counter-affidavit dated 08.12.2021, sworn by incumbent Deputy Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Tirunelveli Sub-Commissioner ate. Though styled and captioned counter-affidavit, it is in effect an affidavit as the respondents' stated position (in response to paragraph 10 of the writ affidavit) reads as follows: 4. The above stated position of respondents draws the curtains i.e., drops the curtains on the captioned main writ petition as the respondents have made it clear that writ petitioner's case is correct and the petitioner need not have to pay tax which triggered captioned matter. There is no disputation or disagreement between both sides on this. 5. Before I pronounce the operative portion of this order, I deem it appropriate to place on record appreciation of this Court for the fair approach taken by the learned Revenue counsel and the respondents. 6. There is no disputation or disagreement between both sides on this. 5. Before I pronounce the operative portion of this order, I deem it appropriate to place on record appreciation of this Court for the fair approach taken by the learned Revenue counsel and the respondents. 6. Owing to the aforementioned stated position of the respondents, the articulation of which has been extracted and reproduced supra, the sequitur is captioned writ petition is allowed and the first respondent shall issue a discharge certificate as sought for in the prayer in the writ petition either manually or electronically within eight weeks from today i.e., on or before 21.01.2022. Consequently, captioned WMP is disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs.