Centre For Developmental Education vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court did not decide on the merits of the case. The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution because the petitioner's counsel was absent on the day the case was called. The Court had previously granted multiple opportunities for the removal of office objections and for representation. Since no representation was made on the final listing, the Court found no alternative but to dismiss the writ petition. No specific provisions of the GST Act or any circulars were discussed or relied upon in the decision to dismiss the petition. The core issue regarding the validity of the notification and its impact on higher education institutions remains undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Centre for Developmental Education, IFIM Institutions, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents (Union of India and State Department of Revenue) to remove Clause No. 9 of a Notification dated October 2017, or to withdraw the entire notification. This notification imposed Goods and Services Tax (GST) on private higher education institutions that outsourced their auxiliary services. The petition was listed multiple times, with the court granting extensions for removing office objections. On the final date of hearing, there was no representation from the petitioner's counsel.

Key Issues

1. Whether Clause No. 9 of the Notification dated October 2017, imposing GST on private higher education institutions outsourcing auxiliary services, is liable to be removed or withdrawn, as per Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner argued for the removal or withdrawal of the said clause and notification, contending that it unfairly imposes GST on their outsourced auxiliary services. The respondents' arguments are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner failed to prosecute the case by not appearing on multiple occasions.