Gopakumar S. vs. Kerala Water Authority
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 28115 OF 2021 PETITIONER: GOPAKUMAR S., AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. P.SHANKARANARAYANA PILLAI, SAI KRISHNA, PLAVODU, KODUNGANOOR P.O, VATTIYURKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695021. BY ADVS. SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY SRI.ANIL GEORGE RESPONDENTS: 1 KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, JALABHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695033. 2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION, SOUTH, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, OBSERVATORY HILLS, VELLAYAMBALAM-TRIVANDRUM – 695033. BY ADV SHRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.28115/2021 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 17th day of January, 2022 The petitioner, who is a registered Government Contractor carrying out contract works of the Kerala Water Authority, has filed this writ petition seeking to command the respondents to comply with the direction in Ext.P3 Circular.
The petitioner submits that he has quoted for the tender for the Deposit work of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation-Project No.SO 164/19-Replacement of old existing 110mm AC pipes with 110mm PVC at Karithode line and Kaduvetti line in Kanjirampara ward. An agreement was entered into between the 2nd respondent and the petitioner on 21.02.2019. The work was completed on 10.07.2019. 3. The petitioner states that at the time of signing the agreement, GST was in effect but there was no provision for
WP(C).No.28115/2021 3 GST in the agreement. The Kerala Water Authority issued a Circular. It says that GST amount paid by the petitioner and similarly situated persons should be reimbursed. However, the respondents did not take any action to reimburse the amount paid by the petitioner towards GST. In the circumstances, the respondents are compellable to calculate the GST amount due to the petitioner and disburse the same.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner’s contract is covered by Ext.P3 Circular. Going through the pleadings in the writ petition, it is seen that the petitioner has approached the 2nd respondent filing Ext.P4 representation for redressal of grievances relating to GST reimbursement. Therefore, this Court finds that no adjudication is needed in this writ petition at this point of time. The writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation submitted by the
WP(C).No.28115/2021 4 petitioner within a stipulated time. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 representation filed by the petitioner within a period of two months. N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR
WP(C).No.28115/2021 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28115/2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 21.02.2019 SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.04.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. GST/002/17 DATED 10.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. SR //// PA TO JUDGE
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.