Sanjeev Pachauri And 9 Others vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Held
The Court did not delve into the merits of the deductions made for GST and service charges. Instead, it disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioners to make individual representations to the competent authority, identified as respondent no. 1. These representations must be submitted within thirty days from the date of the order. The competent authority is then directed to consider and dispose of these representations expeditiously, preferably within sixty days thereafter. The Court's decision focuses on the procedural aspect of grievance redressal rather than adjudicating the substantive claim regarding the legality of the deductions. No specific finding was made on the validity of the GST or service charge deductions, nor was any amount in dispute quantified by the Court.
Facts
The petitioners, Sanjeev Pachauri and 9 others, have filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking payment of their full honorarium. They have been working on the Poshan Abhiyaan project since August 2021. The petitioners allege that unnecessary deductions have been made from their honorarium since November 2022, purportedly for Goods and Services Tax (GST) and service charges. They had submitted individual representations to the competent authority within the Department of Women & Child Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh, concerning these deductions. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents suggested that these individual representations could be considered.
Key Issues
1. Whether the deductions made from the petitioners' honorarium for Goods and Services Tax (GST) and service charges are legally permissible and justified, considering the nature of their engagement and the project they are working on? The petitioners contend that the deductions are unnecessary and not legally tenable. They are seeking the full honorarium amount due to them. The respondents, through the learned Standing Counsel, have not presented specific arguments on the legality of the deductions but have agreed to consider the individual representations made by the petitioners. The core of the dispute revolves around the validity of these deductions from the honorarium paid to the project workers.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:175170 Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13569 of 2023 Petitioner :- Sanjeev Pachauri And 9 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Neeraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for payment of full honorarium amount which according to them has become due. They have been working with the respondents in a project namely, Poshan Abhiyaan since August, 2021. 2.They claim to have been subjected to certain unnecessary deductions from November, 2022 in the name of goods and services tax and service charge.
It transpires from the record that the petitioners have moved some representations before the competent authority of department of Women & Child Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh, in the matter individually.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that the representations of the respective petitioners can be directed to be considered, if made individually, in respect of their grievances.
In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of with the direction that in the
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.