M/S Sai Info Services vs. State Of Chhattisgarh
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Sai Info Services, through its proprietor B. Koteswar Rao, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct respondents (State of Chhattisgarh, Collector Bilaspur, Assistant Commissioner Bilaspur, and Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporation Limited) to clear an admissible amount of ₹02,95,688/- plus GST tax. The petitioner also sought interest for any delay in payment as per a rate contract. The respondents are the State of Chhattisgarh and its departments involved in tribal and scheduled caste development, and an industrial development corporation. The petition was filed before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur.
Held
The Court held that the relief sought by the petitioner was contingent upon the resolution of disputed questions of fact. It was determined that these disputed questions of fact could not be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the Court found it inappropriate to entertain the writ petition. The Court's reasoning was based on the principle that writ jurisdiction is not the appropriate forum for resolving complex factual disputes. The Court dismissed the writ petition as being devoid of merit, while explicitly reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to pursue other alternate remedies available under the law. No costs were imposed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can adjudicate a writ petition involving disputed questions of fact? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to compel the respondents to release payment and interest. The specific amount and the entitlement to GST tax were part of the prayer. Revenue/State's Argument: The respondents, through their counsel, submitted that the issue involved disputed questions of fact. They relied on the principle that such matters are not ordinarily entertainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, suggesting alternative remedies should be pursued. The judgment also refers to prior decisions of the Court in WPC No. 2870 of 2025, which dealt with similar issues of disputed facts.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1
2025:CGHC:28098-DB
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2978 of 2025 1 M/s Sai Info Services Through Its Properitor B. Koteswar Rao, Aged About- 36 Years, S/o- Shri Ram Babu Naik, Situated At- House No. 14, Phase- I, Shiva Residency, Mathpurena, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department School Education Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 2 The Collector Bilaspur (Tribal And Scheduled Caste Development Department), District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 Assistant Commissioner (Tribal And Scheduled Caste Development Department) Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 Chhattisgarh State Industrial Develpment Corporation Limited Through Its Chief General Manager (Marketing), Office At- 1st Floor, Udhyog Bhawan, Ring Road No.- 01, Telibandha, Raipur- 492006 (C.G.)
... Respondent(s) JYOTI SHARMA JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.06.27 12:09:19 +0530
2 For Petitioner : Mr. Rajat Agrawal, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Praful N. Bharat, A.G. along with Mr. S
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 Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.