M/S Adnanul Haq Contractors Bahraich Thru. Proprietor Adnanul Haq vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Energy Lko. And 3 Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Adnanul Haq Contractors Bahraich, represented by its Proprietor Adnanul Haq, approached the High Court seeking payment for work done under agreements executed in 2016-2017. The respondent, a Corporation represented by Ms. Neera Yadav, stated that payment could not be processed as the petitioner had not provided the invoice and GST number. Consequently, measurements for the work had not been taken, and the measurement book had not been prepared. The Corporation indicated that the claim would be considered and a decision taken upon completion of these formalities.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by observing that the petitioner should complete the necessary formalities as required by a letter dated 6.4.2024 (Annexure-6). This action is to enable the opposite parties to take the requisite steps for considering the petitioner's claim, as stated by their counsel. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's claim for payment but directed the completion of procedural requirements. The core of the decision is that the petitioner must fulfill the documentation requirements before the respondent can proceed with the assessment and payment process. No specific amount in dispute was recorded.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to payment for work done under agreements from 2016-2017, given the respondent's contention that essential documentation (invoice and GST number) is missing, thereby preventing measurement and preparation of the measurement book? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought payment for work completed under agreements. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the petitioner regarding the GST number or invoice, but implicitly seeks payment for work done. Respondent's Argument: The respondent argued that payment is contingent upon the petitioner providing the invoice and GST number. Without these, measurements cannot be taken, and the measurement book cannot be prepared, thus precluding consideration of the claim.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10538 of 2024 Petitioner :- M/S Adnanul Haq Contractors Bahraich Thru. Proprietor Adnanul Haq Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Energy Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sheikh Mohammad Ali Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Neera Yadav Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard.
The petitioner seeks payment of dues in pursuance of some work done from the concerned opposite parties in pursuance to an agreements, which were executed in the year, 2016-2017, however, Ms. Neera Yadav learned counsel for the Corporation says that invoice and GST number etc. have not been provided by the petitioner on account of which measurements have not taken place and measurement book has also not been prepared. If the formalities are completed then the claim would be considered and decision would be taken.
In view of above, we dispose of this writ petition with the observation that the petitioner should complete the formalities as required vide letter 6.4.2024 contained as Annexure-6 so that the requisite steps be taken by the opposite parties as stated by their counsel Ms. Neera Yadav. [Brij Raj Singh, J.] [
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.