M/S SAMEER MEDICAL AGENCYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                          WRIT TAX No. - 3701 of 2026

M/S Sameer Medical Agency
                                                                   .....Petitioner(s)
                                      Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)          : Ajay Kumar Yadav, Ashish Bansal,
                                     Ayush Kumar Mishra, Vaishali Gupta
Counsel for Respondent(s)          : C.S.C.

Court No. - 39
                 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
                 HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.

1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
Arvind Kumar Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. We are not impressed with the submissions advanced that the writ petition
may be maintained, as no ground of suppression is made out.

3. Earlier, being visited by an adjudication order dated 26.03.2026, the
petitioner had approached this Court by means of Writ Tax No. 2346 of
2026. It was disposed of vide order dated 14.05.2026 on following terms:

     "(i) The impugned adjudication order dated 26.03.2026 is set aside.

     (ii) The petitioner may file its final reply to the show-cause notice dated
     30.09.2025 within a period of two weeks from today.

     (iii) Thereafter, the adjudicating authority may fix and communicate to
     the petitioner the date for personal hearing with at lease 15 days advance
     notice.

     (iv) The adjudicating authority may then pass appropriate reasoned order
     within a further period of one month such that the proceedings may be
     concluded on or before 31.07.2026."

4. Thereafter, the petitioner has participated in the proceedings. He had
filed reply and adjournment had been sought, but it was declined.
                                                                                            WTAX No. 3701 of 2026
                                                                   2


                                    Thereafter, the order was passed on 28.07.2026.

                                    5. To the extent, merit order has been passed after taking on record the
                                    objection raised in face of opportunity of personal hearing not availed, we
                                    leave it open to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy, in accordance
                                    with law.

                                    6. Primarily, interference is offered in such cases where the noticee may
                                    act with promptitude i.e. at the stage of issuance of show cause notice.
                                    Here, the show cause notice had culminated in an ex-parte order. On
                                    challenge raised, limited interference was offered to the ex-parte nature of
                                    the order. No interference was made on the ground being now pressed.
                                    Accordingly, in face of statutory remedy of appeal available, interference
                                    claimed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is declined.

                                    7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the
                                    petitioner to avail statutory remedy, in accordance with law.

                                    8. Initially, learned counsel for the petitioner had relied on M/s Tata Steel
                                    Limited Vs. Union of India and Others, 2026 INSC 920. However, on
                                    being queried if the direction contained in the last sentence of paragraph
                                    no. 15 of the order may be made applicable with appropriate
                                    modification, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
                                    remedy of appeal may be better suited.



                                                   (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
                                    September 9, 2026
                                    #Vikram/-




Digitally signed by :-
VIKRAM GUPTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad