Writ petition dismissed for non-payment under Sabka Vishwas Scheme 2019; Court lacks authority to revive post-expiration

The Court dismissed the writ petition as the petitioner failed to make the payment under the "Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019" within the specified deadline, rendering them ineligible for its benefits. The Court held that it lacked the authority to revive or modify the Scheme post its expiration, especially for a single individual, given the cessation of the committee overseeing the Scheme. Consequently, the Court denied the petitioner's request for consideration under the Scheme, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition.

---

---

Issues:
Petitioner seeks direction for consideration under "Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019" after missing payment deadline.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition requesting direction on the respondents for considering their case under the "Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019" (Scheme of 2019). The petitioner claimed they were unable to make the payment under the Scheme by the specified deadline due to an order from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and subsequent legal constraints. The respondents, through their counsel, objected to the petitioner's prayer, arguing that the Scheme was operational until June 30, 2020, and the committee responsible for its implementation no longer existed. The respondents contended that since the petitioner failed to make the payment within the stipulated timeframe as required by the Scheme, they were not entitled to its benefits.

Upon considering the arguments presented by both parties and examining the case records, the Court noted that the Scheme of 2019 was introduced by the respondents to provide relief in service tax matters. It was mandatory to make the payment under the Scheme within the specified timeframe, which the petitioner failed to comply with, possibly due to NCLT's order or legal restrictions. The Court deliberated on whether it had the authority to issue a direction contrary to the provisions of the Scheme, especially considering that the Scheme was no longer in effect, and the committee responsible for case consideration had ceased to exist.

The Court emphasized that it could not revive or alter the Scheme beyond its intended period or relax any conditions set forth in it for the benefit of a single individual, especially when the committee under the Scheme was no longer functional. Consequently, the Court concluded that the prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition could not be granted for the consideration of their case under the Scheme. As a result, the Court found no justification to accept the petitioner's prayer and dismissed the writ petition accordingly.

---