Delhi High Court
Sales Tax Bar Association vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Another on 12 January, 2011
Author: Dipak Misra,Chief Justice
26.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 14052/2006
SALES TAX BAR ASS. ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Sudhir Sangal, President STBA
and Mr. Akhilesh Garg, Joint Secretary,
STBA.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ..... Respondent
Through Ms. Zubeda Begum, Advocate for
GNCTD.
Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate for DDA.
Mr. Sachin Dutta & Mr. Abhimanyu Kumar,
Advocates for UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
ORDER
% 12.01.2011
The present Public Interest Litigation was filed by Sales Tax Bar
Association seeking the relief that the respondent should be commended
to construct chambers for members of the Sales Tax Bar Association.
Though a number of reliefs have been made to in the prayer clause, yet
we are not inclined to refer to the same.
2. Be it noted, though this case has a chequered history, yet Ms.
Zubeda Begum, learned counsel for the State has filed an office note
dated 28th December, 2010. We proceed to reproduce the same:-
" Reference proposal at page 69/N
received from Trade & Taxes Department
regarding C/o Annexe Building for Trade &
Taxes department at an estimated of Rs.62.43
Crores.
On examined the file/proposal it has
been observed that Department has not
submitted the relevant documents in original
pertaining to above said proposal. Moreover,
Department has also not submitted the
relevant certificate from Chief Engineer, duly
counter-signed by competent authority.
If agreed, we may refer the proposal
back to the Administration Department with
the request to resubmit the proposal with
original documents viz proposal in part A &
B, History Sheet, Abstract of cost, EFC memo
and requisite Certificate of Chief Engineer
duly counter-signed by the competent
authority to facilitate further processing of the
case. It is worthwhile to mention here that
after completion of CWG Projects, PWD may
be in a position to undertake the works related
to Govt. Buildings. If this can be arranged it
would save the cost of 5% of construction
which is to be paid to other Agencies in terms
of PMC/DC. Therefore, possibility may be
explored in consultation with Pr. Secy.
PWD/ENC.
However, if the said possibility of
roping in PWD does not materialize, Deptt.
Should enter into a contract with DSIIDC to
take up the work on the following terms &
conditions.
1) Work shall be awarded to the Construction
Agency after completion of CODAL
FORMALITIES as per the provisions of
CPWD Manual, GFRs and other relevant
rules, instructions, guidelines etc.
2) Govt. of NCT of Delhi approves the estimates
at DSR 2007 and Cost Index items @ 9%,
DC/PMC including consultancies @ 5%
(when project is assigned to any Agency other
than PWD/I&FC) and contingencies and
labour cess @ 1% each for Civil/Electric
Works and an undertaking from the Agency
that it is willing to work on these parameters
of cost estimation.
3) Works shall be completed within the given
time-frame and within the sanctioned cost and
as per CPWD Manual.
4) The Administrative Deptt. and/or
Construction Agency must not change the
scope of work on their own. It shall be
brought before the EFC for approval if there is
any such change perceived subsequently.
5) Admn. Deptt./Construction Agency may
identify the probable impediments in the
execution of the projects well in advance and
may project contingent measures/plan as
identified to deal with them, so as to ensure
the timely completion of the projects.
6) Work completion certificate and copy of the
3rd party Quality Control Certificate may be
furnished to Admn. Deptt. & FD on
completion of the work.
7) The Construction Agency will submit the final
bill to Admn. Deptt. showing utilization of
funds, completion of project and settlement of
advance/deposit money on the completion of
the Work/Project."
3. On a query being made, Ms. Zubeda Begum, learned counsel for
the State has fairly stated that the Government of National Capital
Territory of Delhi has taken a policy decision to construct the chambers
for members of the Sales Tax Bar Association but the agency has to be
chosen regard being had to the cost effect.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission, we do not intend to keep the
writ petition pending and direct that the State Government shall construct
adequate chambers for members of the Sales Tax Bar Association by end
of February, 2012 as per their policy decision. The allotment of the
chambers shall be made in consultation with the High Court.
5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no
orders as to costs.
CHIEF JUSTICE
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
JANUARY 12, 2011
VKR
