State Of Chhattisgarh vs. M/S. Bsbk Private Limited

Facts

This appeal was filed by the State of Chhattisgarh and its departments against an order dated April 29, 2024, passed by a learned Single Judge in WPC No. 5057/2023. The writ petition was filed by M/s. BSBK Private Limited (respondent No. 1). The appellants sought to set aside the Single Judge's findings regarding the entitlement of price escalation and GST refund for the respondent. They also challenged the directions issued to the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, to prepare a report on site allotment and pass an order on price escalation. The appellants' appeal was delayed by 146 days, which was condoned by the Court.

Held

The Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the facts and issues involved were identical to a previous case, WA No. 354 of 2024, and other related appeals, which were decided by a coordinate bench on June 24, 2024. In that prior decision, the coordinate bench had affirmed the order of the learned Single Judge, finding no illegality or irregularity. The Court noted that the previous judgment had directed the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, to critically examine the matter and prepare a report within sixty days regarding site allotment after affording a hearing to all concerned. The State was also directed to pass an appropriate order on price escalation, particularly for sites handed over in 2022 and thereafter, completing the exercise within a further sixty days. The Court found these directions to be just and proper, warranting no interference. Therefore, following the precedent set in the identical batch of appeals, the present appeal was also dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the appeal and set aside/quash the order dated 29/04/2024 passed by Hon'ble Single Bench in WP (C) No. 5057/2023 M/s BSBK Private Limited V. State of Chhattisgarh & Others. (Question of law) 2. Whether the Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside the findings related to the entitlement of price escalation as have been made by the Hon'ble Single Bench and hold that the Private Respondent is not entitled to Price Escalation for the sites handed over to them in the year 2022 and thereafter. (Question of law) 3. Whether the Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside the findings related to the entitlement of GST refund awarded to Private Respondent No. 1 and hold that the said respondent is not entitled for the same. (Question of law) 4. Whether the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the directions issued to the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, to prepare a report within 60 days regarding the allotment of sites to the petitioner and to pass an appropriate order on price escalation within a further period of 60 days. (Question of law) Appellants' Contentions: The appellants argued that the private respondent is not entitled to price escalation for sites handed over in 2022 and thereafter, nor are they entitled to a GST refund. They also sought to quash the directions for report preparation and price escalation orders. Respondents' Contentions: The respondents argued that the order passed by the learned Single Judge was correct and did not suffer from any illegality or irregularity. They also indicated willingness to extend bank guarantees.