Vijeta Projects And Infrastructure LTD. Through One Of Its Director, Sri Ravindra Bharti vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Chief Secretary, Government Of Jharkhand

Facts

The petitioner, Vijeta Projects and Infrastructure Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court challenging actions by the State of Jharkhand and its entities. The petition involved three issues: price variation, refund of GST, and labour costs. Following court intervention, the parties engaged in meetings to explore amicable settlement. A supplementary affidavit was filed by respondents 4 and 5 (Jharkhand State Building Construction Corporation Ltd. and its Executive Engineer) annexing minutes of a meeting dated February 19, 2026, which reflected a consensus on at least one issue. The petitioner confirmed an agreement was reached regarding price variation.

Held

The Court recorded that the parties had settled the issue of price variation. Respondent nos. 4 and 5 were directed to pay the amounts due on account of price variation to the petitioner on or before March 25, 2026, which statement was accepted. Regarding the remaining two issues concerning the refund of GST and labour costs, the Court permitted the petitioner to make a representation to respondent nos. 4 and 5. If such a representation is made, it should be disposed of in accordance with law by the said respondents within two months of its receipt. All contentions of all parties on the merits of these remaining issues were explicitly left open, as the Court had not investigated into their merits or demerits. The petitioner was granted liberty to challenge any decision on the representation that is not acceptable, before the appropriate forum. The petition was disposed of in these terms.

Key Issues

1. Whether the parties have reached a settlement on the issue of price variation, and if so, whether the respondents should be directed to make payments accordingly (turning on principles of contract and settlement). 2. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to make a representation to the respondents regarding the refund of GST and labour costs, and if so, whether the respondents should be directed to dispose of such representation within a time-bound period (turning on principles of administrative law and procedural fairness). Petitioner's contentions: An agreement has been reached on price variation, and payment should be made. The petitioner will represent on GST and labour costs, seeking directions for timely disposal of the representation. If unsuccessful, the petitioner reserves the right to pursue further legal channels. Respondents' contentions: The respondents, through their counsel, accepted the statement regarding the price variation settlement and agreed to make payments by a specified date. They also agreed to the process for representing on the remaining issues.