Chander Bhaga Advertisement Agency vs. Union Territory Of J And K And Ors. (Rural Development)

Held

The Court perused the interim application, the main petition, and the enclosed documents. It noted that there is an admitted liability of the respondents towards the petitioner amounting to Rs. 29,98,846/-. The Court acknowledged that the petitioner has been suffering due to the non-payment of this due amount. Considering the grievance of the petitioner and the relief sought, and finding that the matter could be disposed of at the threshold stage without prejudicing any party, the Court decided to take up the writ petition for final disposal. The Court directed the respondents to immediately consider the payment of the due liability to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks and submit a compliance report. The Court did not explicitly discuss any specific GST provisions or rules in its decision.

Facts

The petitioner, Chander Bhaga Advertisement Agency, a proprietorship firm and an empanelled vendor, seeks payment of Rs. 29,98,846/- for organizing a "National Work Shop on Panchayat with Good Governance" from August 21st to 23rd, 2023. The work was initially awarded for Rs. 25,50,505/-. The petitioner claims to have performed additional tasks on verbal instructions, increasing the total amount. Two invoices were raised: one for Rs. 25,50,505/- and another for Rs. 4,48,341/- for the additional work, inclusive of GST. Despite communications from the respondents requesting itemized bills for reconciliation, and the petitioner submitting them, the admitted liability has not been paid for over a year and a half, causing significant financial hardship to the petitioner, a registered MSME. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking payment and interest on the delayed amount.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents have an admitted and undisputed liability to pay the petitioner Rs. 29,98,846/- for services rendered in organizing the "National Work Shop on Panchayat with Good Governance" and associated additional works. 2. Whether the withholding of the admitted liability by the respondents is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of the petitioner's constitutional rights, including the right to livelihood and property. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the respondents have admitted liability through their communications dated January 7, 2024, and August 13, 2024. They contended that the withholding of payment is arbitrary, without legal justification, and violates Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 300A of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also claimed entitlement to interest on the delayed payment due to financial hardship and bank liabilities as an MSME. Respondents' Arguments: No arguments were recorded for the respondents as they were not represented.