M/S. HARILAL AJAY AND CO., THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY NAMELY SAMAREN CHATTERJEE vs UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, RANCHI Advocate - PARTH S. A. SWAROOP PATI — JHHC10015982026

Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: JHHC010015982026

Filing Number

WPC/520/2026

Filing Date

15-Jan-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Mr.justice Rajesh Shankar

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Mr.justice Rajesh Shankar

Bench Type

Division Bench

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S. HARILAL AJAY AND CO., THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY NAMELY SAMAREN CHATTERJEE

    Adv. SUMEET GADODIA,SHILPI SANDIL,SHILPI SANDIL, ,NILLOHIT CHOUBEY,MS. SHRUTI SHEKHAR,SANYA KUMARI,NIDHI LALL,ANISH LAL,SHILPI SANDIL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, RANCHI Advocate - PARTH S. A. SWAROOP PATI

  2. 2.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, (HEADQUARTERS), CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, RANCHI

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Mr.justice Rajesh ShankarView PDF

    Case Summary: The High Court of Jharkhand adjourned the writ petition filed by M/s Harilal Ajay & Co. against Union of India (GST authorities). The petitioner was given three weeks to clear office objections; failure to do so will result in automatic dismissal for want of prosecution. If objections are cleared, the matter will be placed for admission after three weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Orders(with defect)

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Mr.justice Rajesh Shankar

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 15-Jan-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The High Court of Jharkhand adjourned the writ petition filed by M/s Harilal Ajay & Co. against Union of India (GST authorities). The petitioner was given three weeks to clear office objections; failure to do so will result in automatic dismissal for want of prosecution. If objections are cleared, the matter will be placed for admission after three weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case