Rupesh Kumar Son Of Rameshwar Prasad Resident Of v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNACivil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11160 of 2019 ====================================================== 1.Ramashankar Prasad Son of Late Rameshwar Prasad Resident of 207, SuryaVihar Apartment, Exhibition Road, Patna- 800001, At present 403, BalajiResidency, Near Namrada Apartment, New Dak Bunglow Road, PatnaVihar Apartment, Exhibition Road, Patna- 800001, At present 403, BalajiResidency, Near Namrada Apartment, New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna 2.Lalmani Prasad Wife of Rameshwar Prasad Resident of 207, Surya ViharApartment, Exhibition road, Patna- 800001, At present 403, BalajiResidency, Near Namrada Apartment, New Dak Bunglow Road, PatnaApartment, Exhibition road, Patna- 800001, At present 403, BalajiResidency, Near Namrada Apartment, New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna 3.Rupesh Kumar Son of Rameshwar Prasad Resident of 207, Surya ViharApartment, Exhibition Road, patna- 800001, At present 403, BalajiResidency, Near Namrada Apartment, New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna.Apartment, Exhibition Road, patna- 800001, At present 403, BalajiResidency, Near Namrada Apartment, New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Patna. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax Patna. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5, Patna. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5, Patna. 5.The Director of Income Tax Circle-5, Patna. 6.The Deputy Director of Income Tax Circle-5, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================withMiscellaneous Appeal No. 219 of 2011 ======================================================Rupesh Kumar. ... ... Appellant/s Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax And A ... ... Respondent/s====================================================== withMiscellaneous Appeal No. 220 of 2011 ======================================================Lalmani Pd. ... ... Appellant/s Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax-II ... ... Respondent/s====================================================== with Miscellaneous Appeal No. 221 of 2011 ======================================================Rama Shankar Pd ... ... Appellant/s Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax And A ... ... Respondent/s======================================================Appearance :(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11160 of 2019)For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate.: Ms. Manini Jaiswal, Advocate.For the Respondent/s: Mrs. Archana Sinha, Sr. Advocate. : Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate. 16 19-02-2025 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRAORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed forissuance of a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or anyother appropriate writ, order or direction commanding therespondents to release the paper and documents seized on26.09.1996 during search and seizure operation in connectionwith warrant of authorization dated 23.09.1996 issued underSection 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 37A of theWealth Tax Act, 1957. 2. Grievance of petitioners has not been redressed 16 19-02-2025 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRAORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed forissuance of a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or anyother appropriate writ, order or direction commanding therespondents to release the paper and documents seized on26.09.1996 during search and seizure operation in connectionwith warrant of authorization dated 23.09.1996 issued underSection 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 37A of theWealth Tax Act, 1957. 2. Grievance of petitioners has not been redressed timely, on the other hand, during pendency of the presentpetition and on our observation on the previous occasion on21.01.2025 concerned respondent have opened their eyes andproceeded to redress the grievance of petitioners which waspending consideration for the last about 6 years. Taking note ofbelated redressing the grievance of the petitioner for about 6years, cost is warranted to be imposed on the respondents. ritik/- U Therefore, respondents are hereby directed to pay litigation costto the petitioners and it is quantified at Rs.25,000/-. Cost shallbe paid within a period of two months from today. 3. Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of. 4. The petitioners are hereby directed to approach the concerned respondent in respect of any grievance stillsubsisting. In this regard, if the petitioners approach theconcerned authority, the concerned authority is hereby directedto redress remaining grievance within a reasonable period fromthe date of their application/ representation. 5. In the light of disposal of C.W.J.C. No.11160 of2019, M.A. Nos.219 of 2011, 220 of 2011 and 221 of 2011stand de-linked. 6. Registry is hereby directed to list theaforementioned M.As. before the concerned roster Bench. (P. B. Bajanthri, J) (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)