Facts of the Case

KCP Infra Ltd (formerly KCP Engineers Pvt Ltd), a road-construction contractor, had been executing a road-widening and strengthening project for the Kerala Road Fund Board (KRFB) under an agreement dated 14.12.2016 — that is, before the GST regime was implemented. The petitioner's grievance was that following the GST rollout, the applicable rate for works contract services changed to 18%, and it had submitted a representation (Exhibit P12) on 07.06.2023 to the Project Director, KRFB, seeking implementation of this rate change and consequential payment, along with other connected reliefs. This representation, and several earlier ones dated as far back as 25.01.2019, had gone undecided.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the second respondent (Project Director, KRFB) was obliged to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation (Exhibit P12) seeking implementation of the 18% GST rate for its works contract services.
  2. Whether any specific direction on the merits of the GST rate-change claim was warranted at the writ stage.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner was mainly aggrieved by non-consideration of its representation (Exhibit P12) seeking implementation of the GST rate change to 18% for its works contract services.
  • Other connected reliefs regarding payment of dues under the road-widening contract were also sought in the representation.
  • Multiple earlier representations dating back to 2019, 2021 and 2021 had similarly gone unanswered.

Respondent's Arguments

  • No specific counter-arguments contesting the rate-change claim on merits are recorded; the respondents' side was represented by the Standing Counsel for KRFB and the Government Pleader, who did not oppose a direction for consideration of the pending representation.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court did not decide whether the petitioner is entitled to the GST rate-change reimbursement.
  • It directed the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P12, after giving the petitioner's representative an opportunity of hearing, within two months from receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.
  • The petitioner was directed to serve a certified copy of the judgment along with the writ petition papers on the second respondent to set the process in motion.

Important Clarification

No view was expressed on whether the 18% GST rate change actually entitles the contractor to additional reimbursement under its pre-GST agreement — that substantive question remains for the Project Director, KRFB, to decide on merits, after hearing the contractor, within the time fixed by the Court.

Sections Involved

  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — under which the rate for works contract services was revised to 18%, forming the basis of the petitioner's reimbursement claim.
  • Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226, under which the writ petition was filed.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of without a decision on merits — the petitioner secured only a time-bound direction that its representation for GST rate-change reimbursement be considered and decided by the Kerala Road Fund Board.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam
  • Case Number: WP(C) No. 26261 of 2023
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan
  • Date of Judgment: 11.08.2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.