Sukhpal Kaur vs. State Of Odisha

Held

The Court held that the application for modification was without merit and dismissed it. The Court reasoned that the previous judgments cited by the petitioner, Santosh v. O.S.H.B., Budhimanta Dash, and Dharanidhar Rout, did not contain any challenge to or embargo on the collection of processing fee and applicable GST. The challenge in the original writ petition, as per the Court's understanding, was the basis for levying the processing fee on benchmark valuation, with the petitioner arguing that instrument value should be used instead of benchmark valuation. The Court found nothing in the cited paragraphs of Santosh (supra) to support the petitioner's claim that the collection of processing fee and GST was prohibited. Therefore, the original direction stood.

Facts

The petitioner, Sukhpal Kaur, filed a writ petition which was disposed of by an order dated 8th December, 2021. The order directed the petitioner to pay a processing fee assessed at 15% of the instrument value plus applicable GST. The petitioner filed an Interlocutory Application (I.A.) seeking modification of this direction, arguing it was contrary to previous High Court judgments. The opposite parties, represented by Mr. Mishra, contended that the direction was correct and the modification application was not maintainable. The dispute revolves around the processing fee and applicable GST levied by the State of Odisha and others.

Key Issues

1. Whether the direction in the order dated 8th December, 2021, requiring the petitioner to pay a processing fee assessed at 15% of the instrument value and applicable GST, is liable to be recalled or modified? (Question of law) Contentions: Petitioner: The direction to pay processing fee and applicable GST should be recalled as it offends the view taken in paragraphs 11 and 14 of Santosh v. O.S.H.B. (2020) and subsequent orders in Budhimanta Dash v. Odisha State Housing Board (W.P.(C) no.6332 of 2021) and Dharanidhar Rout v. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C) no.34828 of 2021). Opposite Parties (represented by Mr. Mishra): The direction for payment of processing fee and applicable GST is correct, and the application for modification is not maintainable.