Rajes Kumar, J. - (1.) By means of the present writ petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: "i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 4.12.2000 passed by the respondent no. 1 (Annexure No. 3); ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to make payment of interest @ 18% per annum to the petitioner due to the petitioner on the principal amount of security of Rs. 1,02,500/- within time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court; iii. issue such other and further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the present case; and iv. award costs of the petition to the petitioner."
(2.) Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows: Petitioner is a registered dealer, both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act and is carrying on the business of manufacturing and sales of soap. It is claimed that the petitioner purchased some raw material from M/s Reliance Industries Limited, Maharashtra against requisite documents. While the goods were in transit, same were intercepted and seized by the check post officer, Trade Tax department, Fatehpuri Sikri, Agra and the security at Rs. 1,02,500/- was demanded. The security was deposited and the good was released. It appears that the security was deposited by M/s Shruti Traders, Agra alleged to be the dealer, who was looking after the matter of the petitioner. The receipt of the deposit was also issued in the name of M/s Shruti Traders, Agra. In pursuance of the seizure of the goods proceedings under Section 15-A (1)(o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "Act") was initiated against the petitioner. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Trade Tax, Kanpur vide order dated 31.12.1993 dropped the proceeding but observed that the amount of security could not be returned to the petitioner, in as much as it was deposited by M/s Shruti Traders, Agra. It appears that the petitioner filed applications and representation for the refund of the amount and when no action has been taken, Writ Petition No. 473 of 1998 was filed by the petitioner seeking directions to refund the petitioner's money with interest. Division Bench of this Court on 07.04.1999 held that since the respondents have now agreed to refund the amount lying with them to the petitioner, petitioner shall make representation to the authorities concerned, particularly to the respondent no. 1 regarding other contentions including payment of interest Respondent shall decide the same within a period of four weeks, if the representation is made. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
(3.) It appears that the a refund voucher No. 038458 for Rs. 1,02,500/- was prepared on 13.08.1999, in pursuance of Misc. order dated 13.08.1999 passed by Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) 14 Trade Tax, Kanpur. The refund voucher is alleged to have been handed over on 23.12.1999, which was deposited in the bank. On 27.12.1999 the bank has not made the payment with the remark that drawer has stopped the payment. The said amount has been subsequently adjusted with the amount of tax due in the month of January, 2000. Petitioner made a claim of interest and for which made a representation before Commissioner of Trade Tax. When the representation could not be decided, petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 601 of 2000. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of on 24.07.2000 by the following order: "The petitioner has prayed for interest on certain amount of security. This writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the authority concerned to decide the petitioner's representation (copy of which is annexure-2) and any other representation which petitioner may make afresh preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law by a speaking order.";