Withdrawal of statutory appeal bars writ challenge to the same orders, leaving the tribunal's decision operative.

Withdrawal of a statutory appeal against tribunal orders under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 left those orders undisturbed and, in legal effect, affirmed them. On that basis, a writ petition challenging the same orders was held not maintainable. The petitioner's voluntary abandonment of the appellate remedy barred a parallel writ challenge to the identical orders, and the petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable after the petitioner had withdrawn the earlier statutory appeal against the same tribunal orders, and whether such withdrawal resulted in affirmation of the tribunal's orders.

Analysis: The earlier appeal under section 36 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was withdrawn by the petitioner. Once the statutory appeal challenging the impugned orders was voluntarily withdrawn, the petitioner could not be permitted to invoke writ jurisdiction against the same orders. The withdrawal of the appeal had the legal effect of leaving the tribunal's orders undisturbed and, in that sense, affirming them.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the tribunal's orders failed because the petitioner had already abandoned the statutory appellate remedy against those very orders.

Ratio Decidendi: A party that withdraws a statutory appeal against an order cannot ordinarily maintain a writ petition challenging the same order, since withdrawal leaves the impugned order affirmed and operative.

---