E.V. Raju vs Kerala Water Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 20684 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                        PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
       TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 13TH ASWINA, 1943
                              WP(C) NO. 21035 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

                  E.V. RAJU
                  AGED 67 YEARS
                  S/O.A.V.VARGHESE,
                  RESIDING AT EDAYANAL HOUSE,
                  PAZHAMTHOTTAM.P.O,
                  ALUVA, ERNAKULAM-683 565.

                  BY ADV TESSY JOSE


RESPONDENTS:

       1          KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
                  REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
                  JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM,
                  THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.P.O,
                  THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

       2          THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
                  KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
                  P.H.CIRCLE, KANNUR-670 012.

       3          THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
                  KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
                  W.S.DIVISION, KANNUR-670 012.

       4          THE FINANCE MANAGER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
                  KERALA WATER AUTHORITY JALABHAVAN,
                  VELLAYAMBALAM,
                  THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

                  SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC
THIS       WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
05.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21035 OF 2021




                                             2




                           BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
                     ===========================
                         W.P.(C) No.21035 of 2020
                         ---------------------------------
                  Dated this the 5 th day of October, 2021

                                         JUDGMENT

Petitioner is an A class Government Contractor, who had

undertaken various works of the Kerala Water Authority.

He had successfully completed the works within the

stipulated time and have even received the bills without

any dispute.

2. However, tax due as GST for the bill amount was not

reimbursed to the petitioner though he claims to have

already paid the said tax. In the meantime, the Kerala

Water Authority issued Ext.P3 circular agreeing to

reimburse the GST applicable for the works carried out by

the contractors on production of payment receipt of GST

towards the goods and services on the respective items

executed under the contract.

WP(C) NO. 21035 OF 2021

3. Petitioner, filed Ext.P4 representation claiming benefit of

Ext.P3 circular and according to the petitioner, no

decision has been taken on Ext.P4.

4. I have heard Adv.Tessy Jose, the learned counsel for the

petitioner as well as Adv.Benjamin Paul, the learned

Standing Counsel.

5. This Court has been noticing several writ petitions seeking

the benefit of the circular issued by the Kerala Water

Authority themselves agreeing to absorb and pay the GST

incurred by the contractors. In spite of the said circular,

it is a matter of concern that the Water Authority is not

adhering to the said decision taken by them. This is yet

another such instance, which reflects the failure of the

Kerala Water Authority to abide by their own decision.

6. Having regard to the circumstances, in the case and the

submissions made by Adv.Tessy Jose, I am of the view

that, this writ petition can be disposed of, directing the WP(C) NO. 21035 OF 2021

first respondent to consider and pass orders upon Ext.P4,

as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within an outer

period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy

of this judgment.

7. It is clarified that if a hearing is required to be

conducted, petitioner shall be granted an opportunity of

hearing within a period of four weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment and the orders thereon

shall be passed within the next four weeks, so that the

above time limit of two months shall be strictly complied

with.

The writ petition is allowed as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE AMV/05/10//2021 WP(C) NO. 21035 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21035/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT NO.36/2017-

18/SE/PHC/KNR DATED 12.10.2017 EXECUTED BETWEEN PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE VOUCHER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED NIL

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR-GST/002/17 DATED 10.8.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 25.8.2021 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS           :   NIL