Quasi-judicial stay power must be decided on merits; an authority cannot refuse jurisdiction because another forum is available.

A statutory stay application under section 19(2-C) had to be decided on merits by the joint Commissioner. The existence of a pending appeal and a similar remedy before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal did not excuse the authority from exercising the distinct quasi-judicial power vested in it. By directing the dealer to approach the Tribunal instead of ruling on the application, the joint Commissioner failed to discharge the statutory duty. The High Court therefore set aside the impugned order and directed reconsideration of the stay request on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the joint Commissioner, while considering an application under section 19(2-C) for continuance of stay pending appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, was bound to decide the request on merits and could decline to consider it merely because an appeal was already pending before the Tribunal.

Analysis: The statutory scheme conferred on the dealer a separate right to seek continuance of stay from the joint Commissioner after the first appellate authority had granted stay. The power under section 19(2-C) was quasi-judicial and had to be exercised on the merits of the application. The availability of a similar remedy before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal did not relieve the joint Commissioner of the duty to consider the application and record a decision one way or the other. By refusing to decide the application on merits and directing the dealer to approach the Tribunal, the joint Commissioner declined to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him by statute.

Conclusion: The joint Commissioner was required to adjudicate the stay application on merits and could not reject it solely on the ground that the appeal was pending before the Tribunal. The impugned order was set aside and reconsideration on merits was directed.

Ratio Decidendi: When a statute confers a distinct quasi-judicial power to decide a stay application, that authority must exercise the power on merits and cannot avoid it by directing the applicant to seek the same relief from another available forum.

---