BharatTaxGST

Sri Chethan Kumar T P vs. State Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/3741/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01007420202418 April 2024Bench: N. V. ANJARIA (CJ),KRISHNA S DIXIT9 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. VIJAYA SHEKARA GOWDA V., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 7

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB WP No. 3741 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3741 OF 2024 (LB-BMP-PIL) BETWEEN: 1. SRI CHETHAN KUMAR T.P. S/O PUTTASINAPPA K.R., AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO. 30/1, 2ND CROSS, JAI JAWAN NAGAR, SUBBAIYANAPALYA, BEHIND GANESHA TEMPLE RAOD, M.S. NAGAR POST, BENGALURU – 560 033. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA SHEKARA GOWDA V.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002. Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB WP No. 3741 of 2024 3. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 4. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 5. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NO. 10, BINNYPET, BINNY FIELDS BENGALURU - 560 023. 6. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND, BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, NO. 13, RAJA RAM MOHAN ROY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 025. 7. THE COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR KARMIKA BHAVAN, ITI COMPOUND DAIRY CIRCLE, BANNERUGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 029. 8. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX NO.1, QUEENS ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU 560 052. 9. THE CHIEF AUDITOR BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB WP No. 3741 of 2024 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR, BBMP COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, SUBHASH NAGAR (MAJESTIC) BEHIND UPPARPET POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 009. 10. THE ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY CONTROLLER OF FINANCE SOUTH ZONE BBMP, JAYANAGAR 2ND BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 011. 11. THE HORTICULTURE SUPERINTENDENT SOUTH ZONE, BBMP, JAYANAGAR 2ND BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 011. 12. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PROJECT, SOUTH BBMP, JAYANAGAR 2ND BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 011. 13. SRI BHUVANESHWARI ENTERPRISES NO. 171, 2ND CROSS, 4TH MAIN, KATHRIGUPPE EAST, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 085. GSTIN NO. 29ANYPG1713F1ZU. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI A.V. GIRISHA. 14. SRI H R PRAMOD S/O H T RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, PWD CONTRACTOR, HAVING OFFICE AT: NO. 171, 2ND CROSS, 4TH MAIN, BSK 3RD STAGE, KATHRIGUPPE EAST, BENGALURU - 560 085. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB WP No. 3741 of 2024 15. SRI AJAY H.R. S/O H.T. RAMAIH, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, CIVIL CONTRACTOR, HAVING OFFICE AT, NO. 171, 2ND CROSS, 4TH MAIN BSK 3RD STAGE, KATHRIGUPPE EAST, BENGALURU - 560 085. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 7) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE AN ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO VIEW THE MATTER SERIOUSLY AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND TO DISMISS THE RESPONDENT No.10 TO 12 IMMEDIATELY THERETO AFTER CONDUCTING DEPARTMENTAL ENQUIRY IF THE RESPONDENTS No.10 TO 12 ARE FOUND GUILTY IN NOT DEDUCTING UNPAID SERVICE TAX, CGST, SGST IN THE BILLS PASSED FROM THE DATE FILING COMPLIANCE FROM THE RESPONDENT No.10 i.e., FROM 24.05.2022 AND 02.07.2022 AND ALSO NOT OBTAINING AND ASCERTAINING THE DETAILS OF ESI AND PF PAYABLE BY THE RESPONDENTS No.13 TO 15 FROM THE DATE OF FILING OF COMPLIANCE REPORTS FROM THE RESPONDENTS No.10 AND FROM THE DATE OF INTIMATION GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENTS No.10 IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENTS No.11 AND 12 REGARDING OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE RESPONDENT No.9 IN HIS AUDIT REPORTS FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 DATED 02.07.2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-F BEARING No.UNITHA(DHA)/PR/292/22-23 AND 2019-20 DATED 24.05.2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-G BEARING No.UNITHA(DHA)/PR/170/21-22 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB WP No. 3741 of 2024

ORDER Heard learned advocate Mr.V.Vijaya Shekara Gowda for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar for respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 7-State of Karnataka and its authorities.

2.

The present petition is filed invoking the juri iction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, as public interest litigation.

3.

The petitioner claims to be a public spirited person. He has stated that he holds a bachelor degree and has been carrying out agricultural activities which is the only source of his income.

3.

1 It is stated by the petitioner is that the petitioner is a client of Mr.V.Vijay Shekara Gowda and the said Mr.V.Vijay Shekara Gowda is also the counsel on record for one Mr.S.Venugopal who had filed a Writ Petition No.28802 of 2023. It is stated in the present petition that when the petitioner read the petition papers filed by said Mr.S.Venugopal, the material was found to suggest that respondent Nos.10 to 12 had failed to protect the public funds and had helped respondent Nos.13 to 15 to squander away the NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB public money. The petitioner averred that one Mr.L.Avinash was the friend of said Mr.S.Venugopal- the petitioner of the aforesaid writ petition. He got obtained audit reports prepared by respondent No.9-Chief Auditor of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) in respect of the years 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 from the BBMP by applying under the Right to Information Act, 2005. 3.2 Multiple prayers are advanced by the petitioner. It is prayed is to direct respondent No.2–The Chief Commissioner, BBMP to dismiss respondent Nos.10 to 12 who are the Assistant/Deputy Controller of Finance, Horticulture Superintendent and Executive Engineer respectively in BBMP, after conducting departmental enquiry against them, if they are found to be guilty for not deducting unpaid Service Tax, CGST, SGST in the bills passed from respondent No.10 between 24.05.2022 and 02.07.2022. The petitioner alleged also that these authorities have not ascertained the details of ESI and PF payable by respondent Nos.13 to 15. Respondent Nos.13 to 15 are the persons to whom the work orders were issued in capacity of contractors. 3.2.1 The petitioner wants the respondent authorities to view the matter seriously and to ascertain the sum of unpaid Service Tax, NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB CGST and SGST payable by respondent Nos.13 to 15 for the bills they obtained from 2012. It is also prayed to direct the respondent authorities to conduct the inquiry in the matter and to ascertain whether respondent Nos.13 to 15 have paid ESI and PF in the names of employees and labourers engaged by them.

3.2.

2 The petitioner further seeks direction of this Court against the respondent authorities to issue circular in form of guidelines to the principal employers working in different zones and to direct the Finance Department of the BBMP to withhold the payments of the contractors until they comply with the statutory norms in making the payments of CGST, SGST, ESI and PF.

3.2.

3 Yet another prayer is made to issue circulars to ascertain the details of the employees employed by such contractors and the petitioner also wants to permanently blacklist respondent Nos.13 to 15 for obtaining work orders, bills and payments thereof by playing fraudulent means.

4.

In other words, the grievance is about the alleged irregularities committed by the contractors - respondent Nos.13 to 15 with regard to non-payment of CGST, SGST, ESI and PF NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB thereby, allegedly causing loss to the exchequer. The allegations are also made against the officers of the BBMP relating to finance and for not having provided for payment of CGST, SGST ESI and PF by doing bills in favour of respondent Nos.13 to 15 causing great loss.

5.

The subject matter facts and the prayers advanced in this Public Interest Litigation are in the realm of disciplinary action to be taken by the BBMP against their officers. These are the matters and issues to be gone into and verified by the authorities. Public interest juri iction is not required to be exercised in relation to such matters falling in the domain of the statutory authorities obliged to act under the statutes in accordance with law.

5.

1 Out of information from the third party connections, who claim to be the friends of the petitioner, the petitioner has put forward his case, gathered the details about the alleged irregularities in payment to the contractors and in accounting for CGST, SGST, ESI and PF, the petitioner, therefore, filed this Public Interest Petition. NC: 2024:KHC:15190-DB

5.

2 A close reading of the facts shows that the conduct of the petitioner does not inspire that the action is bona fide in approaching the Court. The very filing of this public interest petition does not inspire credibility.

6.

In any view as stated above, the disciplinary matters are in the realm of the respondent authorities and this Court would not interject itself on the basis of the broad thesis and general allegations pleaded in the petition, too vague to be countenanced.

7.

The present petition is summarily dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE

THM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.