M/S Kk Enterprises vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Facts
M/s K.K. Enterprises, the petitioner, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to upload pending invoices on the ERP portal and release payment of Rs. 1,29,62,91.36 along with applicable GST. The petitioner is seeking payment for services rendered. The judgment notes that facts are not clearly ascertained and that the decision to make payment rests with respondent no. 5, who has not yet made such a decision. The petition was heard by the Allahabad High Court.
Held
The Court held that keeping the writ petition pending or calling for a counter-affidavit would serve no useful purpose at this stage, given that facts were not clearly ascertained and no decision had been made by the competent authority (respondent no. 5). The Court did not decide on the merits of the petitioner's claim for payment or the uploading of invoices. Instead, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before respondent no. 5. This representation should include a personal affidavit, all relevant documents, and the uploaded bills on the designated web portal. Respondent no. 5 is directed to decide this representation strictly in accordance with law by way of a reasoned order within two months of its filing. Any amount found due and payable is to be paid to the petitioner within a further period of two months thereafter.
Key Issues
1. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the respondents to upload pending invoices and release payment to the petitioner? (Question of law and fact, concerning the enforcement of contractual obligations and administrative duties). The petitioner argued that the respondents should be directed to upload their pending invoices on the ERP portal and release the due payment of Rs. 1,29,62,91.36 plus applicable GST. The petitioner sought immediate action from the respondents. The respondents, represented by the State of U.P. and others, did not file a counter-affidavit. The judgment notes that no decision has been made by respondent no. 5 regarding the payment. The Court proceeded without detailed arguments from the respondents on the merits of the payment claim.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90493-DB Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17252 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Kk Enterprises Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bashisth Narain Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shrawan Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Bashishth Narain Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Shrawan Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents.
This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has prayed for the following substantial relief : "A) to issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents, to upload the pending invoices of the Petitioners on the ERP portal immediately and to release the payment of Rs.1296291.36 along with applicable GST to M/s K.K. Enterprises."
Facts are not clearly ascertained. In any case the decision to make payment has to be taken by the respondent no.
No such decision has been made by that authority till date.
In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the pre
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.