Sheikh Jameel vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Facts

The petitioner, Sheikh Jameel, filed a writ petition seeking reconsideration of his claim for payment related to transporter work for the period April 1, 2018, to March 31, 2019. This claim was previously dismissed by the High Court on August 29, 2024, for lack of proof of GST payment. The Court, however, granted the petitioner liberty to submit proof of GST payment to respondents No. 1, 2, and 5, who were directed to reconsider the claim. The petitioner claims to have paid GST of Rs. 66,984 on May 22, 2018, and submitted a note-sheet dated October 10, 2018, obtained under RTI, indicating a proposed payment of Rs. 10,13,314 to the transporter. He asserts he has now filed the claim with proof of GST payment as per the previous court order, but it remains undecided.

Held

The Court held that when the petitioner has submitted documents relating to the payment of GST, the concerned respondent authorities are bound to consider the petitioner's claim and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law. The Court noted that the petitioner had filed documents in relation to GST payment. Therefore, the Court directed respondent No. 4 to consider and decide the petitioner's claim expeditiously and in an objective manner. The reasoning is that the previous order allowed the petitioner to submit proof of payment, and having done so, the authorities must now act upon it. The ratio decidendi is that once a party complies with a court's direction to submit evidence, the concerned authorities must objectively consider such evidence and pass a reasoned order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has provided sufficient proof of GST payment for the period April 1, 2018, to March 31, 2019, as required by the Court's previous order dated August 29, 2024? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contends that he has already paid GST amounting to Rs. 66,984 on May 22, 2018. He further relies on a note-sheet dated October 10, 2018, obtained under RTI, which suggests a proposed payment of Rs. 10,13,314 to the transporter. He argues that pursuant to the High Court's previous order, he submitted his claim along with proof of GST payment to the concerned respondent authorities, but his claim has not yet been considered or decided. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents contend that it is not proven that the petitioner paid Rs. 66,984 towards GST for the period April 1, 2018, to March 31, 2019, for the transporter work.