Rajib Dewri vs. Tiwa Autonomous Council And Anr
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Rajib Dewri, is the President of a Construction Committee that was awarded a construction work valued at Rs. 5 Lakhs. The petitioner has received Rs. 3 Lakhs and is awaiting the second installment of Rs. 1.8 Lakhs. This remaining amount includes Rs. 20,000/- for administrative charges and CGST & SGST, which are payable by the petitioner. The respondent, Tiwa Autonomous Council, through its Principal Secretary, has verified the petitioner's claim and confirmed the successful completion of the contract work.
Held
The Court found that the petitioner is still owed Rs. 1.8 Lakhs for the completed construction work. The respondent, Tiwa Autonomous Council, had verified the petitioner's claim and confirmed the successful completion of the contract. Therefore, the Court directed the respondents to pay the admitted amount of Rs. 1.8 Lakhs to the petitioner. The reasoning is based on the admitted fact that the work was completed and the amount was due. The ratio decidendi is that when a contract work is verified as completed and an amount is admitted to be due, the authority is obligated to release the payment within a reasonable time. The operative direction is for the respondents to pay the petitioner Rs. 1.8 Lakhs within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondent authority is liable to pay the outstanding amount of Rs. 1.8 Lakhs to the petitioner for the completed construction work, considering that Rs. 20,000/- of this amount is designated for administrative charges and GST payable by the petitioner? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argues that the outstanding amount of Rs. 1.8 Lakhs, which includes Rs. 20,000/- for administrative charges and CGST & SGST, is due to him for the completed contract work. He seeks payment of this admitted amount. Respondent's Contention: The respondent, Tiwa Autonomous Council, has verified the petitioner's claim and found that the contract work was successfully completed. They do not appear to have raised any objection to the payment of the admitted amount.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Date : 31.05.2024
Heard Mr. P. Bora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. N. J. Khataniar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. R. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ms. S. Neogi, learned Standing Counsel, Tiwa Autonomous Council.
The petitioner’s case is that he is the President of a Construction Committee,
Page No.# 2/2 which was allotted construction work, the value of which was Rs. 5 Lakh. While Rs. 3 Lakh has been paid to the petitioner, the second installment of Rs. 1.8 Lakhs is still to be paid to the petitioner. He submits that Rs. 20,000/- pertains to administrative charges, CGST & SGST payable by the petitioner.
Mr. R. R. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ms. S. Neogi, learned Standing Counsel, Tiwa Autonomous Council, by referring to para 9 of the affidavit-in- opposition filed by the respondent No. 2, submits that the claim of the petitioner has been verified and found that the petitioner had successfully completed the contract work.
On considering the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and on perusing the pleadings, it is quite apparent that the petitioner is still liable to be paid Rs. 1.8 Lakhs. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to pay the petitioner the admitted amount of Rs. 1.8 Lakhs, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.