Mootness after statutory amendment: challenge to mega power project exemption timing became infructuous once relief was legislatively extended.

The writ petitions challenged an office memorandum concerning the time allowed for furnishing the final mega power status certificate so that excise duty exemption could continue beyond 120 months. During the proceedings, the relevant period was extended to 156 months by amendment to the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, and the amended Fifth Schedule to the Central Excise framework reflected that revised period. Because the relief sought had already been granted by subsequent legislative action, no live controversy remained and the challenge became infructuous, leaving no substantive issue for adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether the challenge to the office memorandum survived after the legislative amendment extended the excise duty exemption period for mega power projects from 120 months to 156 months.

Analysis: The petitions sought extension of the time for furnishing the final mega power status certificate so that excise duty exemption could continue beyond 120 months. During the proceedings, the Union stated that the relevant period had already been extended to 156 months through an amendment to the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, and the amended Fifth Schedule to the Central Excise framework reflected the revised period. Once the very relief sought had been granted by the subsequent amendment, no surviving cause of action remained for adjudication.

Conclusion: The challenge became infructuous and did not warrant further adjudication.

Final Conclusion: The petitions could not proceed further because the legislative and fiscal relief sought had already been accorded by the competent authority, leaving nothing substantive to decide.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the relief sought in a writ petition is subsequently granted by a legislative or statutory amendment, the petition becomes infructuous in the absence of any remaining live controversy.

---