Sitam Realty And Anr. vs. The Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Sitam Realty & ors., filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the disbursement of bills amounting to Rs. 5,51,270/-, including GST and LW cess, for work executed under NIT no. 494/PWD/BMC/ dated 01.10.2024. The petitioners submitted that they had completed the work within the stipulated period, as evidenced by a certificate from the Executive Engineer of the Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation (BMC) dated 09.04.2025, and that their representation dated 11.06.2025 had not resulted in payment. The BMC, represented by Mr. Dey, acknowledged that the job was completed and that the amount due was being processed for disbursement.
Held
The Court held that the municipal authorities ought not to withhold the lawful and just dues of the petitioners. The reasoning was based on the fact that the petitioners were entrusted with executing a job to the extent of Rs. 5,51,270/- (including GST and LW cess), and a certificate dated 09.04.2025 confirmed that the work of Construction of Chainlink fencing at Noapara Sastitala within Ward No.12 under the Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation, to the extent entrusted, had been executed within the stipulated period. The Court directed the municipal authorities to forthwith process the petitioners' bills as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 6 weeks from the date of communication of the order, and disburse the just dues payable to the petitioners. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation (BMC) is obligated to disburse the bills raised by the petitioners for work executed under NIT no. 494/PWD/BMC/ dated 01.10.2024, amounting to Rs. 5,51,270/- including GST and LW cess, given that the work has been completed and certified. Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that they had executed the work within the stipulated time and a completion certificate was in process. They relied on the work order dated 01.10.2024, the Executive Engineer's certificate dated 09.04.2025, and their representation dated 11.06.2025, asserting that their lawful dues should not be withheld. Revenue/State's contention: The BMC, through its counsel, submitted that the petitioners had indeed completed the job and that the respondents were in the process of disbursing the amount due and payable to the petitioners.
Sections Cited
CGST Act, SGST Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
order NIT no.494/PWD/BMC/ dated 01.10.2024 amounting to Rs.5,51,270/- including GST and LW cess.
Ms. Nandy, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has not only drawn the attention of this Court to the work order dated 01.10.2024 but also to the certificate issued by the Executive Engineer of the BMC dated 09.4.2025 to impress upon this Court that the petitioners have not only executed the work within the stipulated period of time but a completion certificate is in the process of being issued.
Ms. Nandy submits that although, the petitioners have submitted representation, the bills raised by the petitioners have not been disbursed. In this context, she has placed reliance on the representation dated 11.06.2025. 4. Mr. Dey, learned advocate appearing for the BMC on instruction submits that in the instant case, the petitioner has, in fact, completed the job and the respondents are in the process of disbursing the amount due and payable to the petitioners.
Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and noting the rival contentions and also noting that the petitioner had been entrusted to execute the job to the extent of Rs.5,51,270/- out of the total tendered amount of Rs.5,52,178/- including GST and LW cess and noting from the certificate dated 09.4.2025 that the work of Construction of Chainlink fencing at Noapara Sastitala within Ward No.12 under the Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation to the extent entrusted, has been executed within stipulated period of time, I am of the view that the municipal authorities ought not to withhold the lawful and just dues of the petitioners.
Accordingly, the municipal authorities are directed to forthwith process the petitioners’ bills as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 6 weeks from the date of communication of this order and disburse the just dues as payable to the petitioners.
With the above direction and observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
All parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from this Court’s official website. (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.