M/S Bhardwaj Construction Company P LTD vs. The State Of Jharkhand

Held

The Court directed the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, to examine the pending representation of the writ petitioner. The decision on the claim is to be taken in accordance with law, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's claim regarding the entitlement to reimbursement or the interpretation of the SOP or the prior judgment. The primary focus was on ensuring that the pending representation was considered by the appropriate authority. The operative direction is for the reconsideration of the representation by the Principal Secretary.

Facts

M/s Bhardwaj Construction Company (P) Ltd. (the petitioner) filed a writ petition seeking directions for the Water Resources Department of the Jharkhand government to reimburse 8% of the value of work done after July 1, 2017. This reimbursement was intended to enable the petitioner to remit their Goods and Services Tax (GST) liability. The petitioner stated that their claim had been rejected previously, but a subsequent policy decision and Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) were introduced. The petitioner also relied on a judgment by a Coordinate Division Bench of the High Court dated October 12, 2022, in W.P.(T) No. 2108 of 2019 and batch cases. A representation based on this SOP and the prior judgment was filed, but no decision was taken. The State respondents acknowledged the pending representation and agreed to reconsider the claim as per law and the SOP.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for reimbursement of 8% of the value of work done after July 1, 2017, to enable remittance of GST liability, in light of the subsequent Standard Operating Procedure and a prior High Court judgment? The petitioner argued that a policy decision and SOP were introduced subsequent to the rejection of their claim. They contended that a Coordinate Division Bench of the High Court had already decided this issue in their favor in W.P.(T) No. 2108 of 2019 and batch cases on October 12, 2022. They further submitted that a representation based on the SOP and the aforementioned judgment was filed for reconsideration of their claim, but no decision had been taken. The respondents (State) conceded that if the representation was pending, the claim would be reconsidered as per the law and the SOP.