High Court of KeralaWP(C)/2061/2013disposed of

N.R. Shaji v. Corporation Of Kochi

2015-11-255 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 2061 of 2013 (G) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- N.R. SHAJI AGED 45 YEARS R.S.P CONSTRUCTIONS KAKKANAD KOCHI 21 RESIDING AT NANIYATTIL HOUSE, OPP.CIIVL STATION, KAKKANAD BY ADVS.SRI.K.J.ABRAHAM SRI.C.AJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. CORPORATION OF KOCHI REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PIN 682031

2. HEALTH OFFICER CORPORATION OF KOCHI PIN 682 031 R1 & 2 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION SRI.P.K.SOYUZ,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 2511-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P(C)nO.2061/2013 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1-TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTIFICATION NO.MOH5/3595/12 DATED 15.2.2012 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT P2-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29.3.2012 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER CALLING FOR NEGOTIATION IN RESPECT OF TIPPER LORRY P3-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31.3.2012 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER CALLING FOR NEGOTIATION IN RESPECT OF JCB P4-TRUE COPY OF THE WORK ORDER NO.MOH5/3592/2012 DATED 3.4.2012 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT P5-TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 3.4.2012 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE FIRST RESPONDENT P6-TRUE COPY OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2012 TILL 9.1.2013 P7-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.11.2012 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITION ER P8-TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 21.11.2012 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT P9-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 2.1.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY SKS P.A TO JUDGE

K.HARILAL, J.

-------------------------------------- W.P(C)NO. 2061 OF 2013 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of November, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a contractor doing civil works. The first respondent invited tender for collection of waste and removal within the limits of Cochin Corporation. The petitioner participated in the tender and he was awarded with the said contract and thereafter he has completed the work on 31.3.2013 as required by the first respondent.

The grievance of the petitioner is that till 2012 all payments were received and thereafter the respondents did not pay the bills on the reason that the petitioner is liable to pay service tax for the work undertaken and already excess payment has been made to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to get a sum of 54,65,921(Rupees fifty four lakhs ₹ sixty five thousand nine hundred and twenty one only) and the said amount is being withheld on the reason that the petitioner is liable to pay service tax. Aggrieved by the said stand, the petitioner made Ext.P8 objection to the second respondent and the second respondent by Ext.P9 letter again insisted to pay service tax.

It is the case of the petitioner that he is not liable to pay service tax in terms of the contract. Thus, a dispute has arisen in respect of the liability to pay service tax, between the petitioner and the respondents and this dispute centres around the terms of contract between the petitioner and the respondents. I am of the view that the resolution of such a dispute is not permissible in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In the above view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to make a representation raising all his contentions to the respondents and the respondents are directed that on receipt of the said representation, the same shall be considered and an order be passed, after affording an opportunity of being heard the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the said representation. With this observation this writ petition is disposed of.

K.HARILAL, JUDGE sks