M/S Dhaneshwar Nath Construction vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Dhaneshwar Nath Construction, sought a direction from the Patna High Court to include GST, Seigniorage Charge, and Labour Cess in the estimate and agreement for a construction and maintenance work. The petitioner also requested a refund of amounts deducted as Seigniorage Charge and Labour Cess from their running account bills, and reimbursement for GST payable. The petitioner argued that these charges were not included in the original estimate and Bill of Quantity, leading to unjust enrichment by the respondents and a breach of contract, violating their fundamental rights. The respondents are the State of Bihar and various authorities within the Rural Works Department. The tax period is not explicitly stated, but the agreement is from 2019-20.

Held

The Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the case. Instead, the petitioner, under instructions, stated that they would be content if a direction was issued to the concerned authority to consider and decide their representation. The respondents agreed that if such a representation is filed, the authority concerned would consider and dispose of it expeditiously. The Court accepted this statement and disposed of the petition with specific terms. These terms include the petitioner filing a representation within four weeks to the Chief Engineer-I, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna. The authority is directed to consider and dispose of the representation expeditiously, preferably within four months, by a reasoned and speaking order, following principles of natural justice and affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties. The Court also reserved liberty for the petitioner to pursue alternative remedies and approach the appropriate forum/Court if needed subsequently. The Court explicitly stated that all issues were left open.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents are legally obligated to include GST, Seigniorage Charge, and Labour Cess in the estimate, Bill of Quantity, and agreement for the construction work, as per the provisions of the agreement and relevant law? 2. Whether the respondents are obligated to refund/reimburse the amounts deducted as Seigniorage Charge and Labour Cess from the petitioner's running account bills, and the GST payable by the petitioner, given that these were not included in the original estimate, Bill of Quantity, and agreement? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the respondents are obliged under law to include GST, Seigniorage Charge, and Labour Cess in the estimate, Bill of Quantity, and agreement. They argued that the non-inclusion and non-refund/reimbursement of these amounts constitute unjust enrichment and a breach of contract, violating their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India. They relied on the principle that a party should not be unjustly enriched at the expense of another. Respondents' Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents.