Sri Sal Krishna Constructions vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable on the short ground that the petitioner had not first approached the concerned authority by making a representation seeking the desired relief. The Court reasoned that without exhausting the administrative remedies available, it is not open for the petitioner to approach the High Court and complain of inaction. Therefore, the Court dismissed the writ petition. No specific issue regarding the merits of granting exemption or lower tariff to the petitioner was decided. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition.

Facts

The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus. The prayer was to declare the action of the Chairman, Office of the GST Council Secretariat, New Delhi, as illegal for not considering the grant of exemption or a lower GST/CGST tariff for the petitioner's concern, on par with Solar and Wind Power Projects. The Court noted that the petitioner had not made any prior representation to the concerned authority seeking such relief before directly approaching the High Court. The Court observed that it is not open for the petitioner to complain of inaction without first approaching the relevant authority.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's action of directly approaching the High Court for a Writ of Mandamus, without first making a representation to the concerned authority, is maintainable? (Question of procedure) Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the action of the Chairman, Office of the GST Council Secretariat, in not considering the grant of exemption or lower tariff was illegal. (Implied argument based on the prayer for a Writ of Mandamus). Revenue's Argument: The revenue did not file any counter or present arguments. The Court noted the absence of any prior representation by the petitioner to the authority concerned.