M/S Brundavan Foundation Reg Trust vs. The Deputy Commissioner And Ors

Held

The Court acknowledged the petitioner's grievance that their representation dated September 9, 2024, had not been considered by the respondents. The respondents, through the High Court Government Pleader, indicated their willingness to consider the representation and pass a necessary order if granted reasonable time. In light of these submissions, the Court directed the respondents to address the petitioner's grievances and consider their representation dated September 9, 2024. The respondents were instructed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court did not delve into the merits of implementing the GST notification itself, focusing instead on ensuring the petitioner's representation was considered. The issue of whether the DHCWMC was legally obligated to implement the notification was implicitly deferred pending consideration of the representation.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Brundavan Foundation Reg Trust, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the District Health Care Waste Management Committee (DHCWMC), Kalaburagi, to implement a Ministry of Finance notification dated July 13, 2022, which imposes GST on the treatment, disposal, and processing of bio-medical waste. The petitioner also sought a direction to the DHCWMC to consider their representation dated September 9, 2024, in light of this notification. The petitioner's grievance was that their representation had not been considered by the respondents. The respondents, represented by the High Court Government Pleader, stated that they would consider and pass an order on the representation if given reasonable time.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the District Health Care Waste Management Committee (DHCWMC) to implement the Ministry of Finance notification dated July 13, 2022, imposing GST on the service of treatment/disposal/processing of bio-medical waste? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the DHCWMC should be directed to implement the notification. Respondents' contention: The respondents did not explicitly argue on the merits of implementing the notification but indicated willingness to consider the petitioner's representation within a reasonable time. 2. Whether the Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the DHCWMC to consider the petitioner's representation dated September 9, 2024, taking into account the Ministry of Finance notification dated July 13, 2022? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner contended that their representation, which sought consideration of the GST notification, had not been addressed. Respondents' contention: The respondents submitted that they would consider and pass a necessary order on the representation if granted reasonable time.