Facts of the Case

Suresh Khatoi filed this writ petition against the Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Odisha and others, seeking a direction to disburse a final deviation value of Rs.2,32,24,088, along with penalty adjustments at specified rates for different periods, and to sanction part bills including GST and CGST components at 12% (from 01.06.2017) and 18% (from January 2022), factoring these into the penalty calculation. The claim arose from a public-works contract.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a writ petition was maintainable to enforce what was essentially a monetary claim arising from a works contract, including its GST/CGST components.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner was entitled to the deviation value and connected GST/CGST components which had not been paid, and sought the Court's direction to disburse the same.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The writ petition was not maintainable at the petitioner's instance, since the claim was a money claim arising purely out of the contract itself, and any such claim should be raised under the terms of the agreement executed between the parties or the conditions stipulated in the tender document (DTCN).

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court declined to entertain the prayer, holding it was, in substance, a contractual money claim not amenable to writ jurisdiction.
  • The petitioner was permitted to approach the appropriate authority in terms of the agreement/DTCN conditions for his financial claim, with the State raising no objection to this course.
  • The writ petition was disposed of permitting the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the appropriate authority in accordance with law — the Court did not examine or rule on the GST/CGST components of the claim on merits.

Important Clarification

This order does not decide any GST question — the GST and CGST figures were simply components of a broader contractual payment dispute (deviation value and penalty) that the Court found unsuitable for writ adjudication. Contractors with similar GST-inclusive billing disputes arising from government works contracts should expect to be directed to pursue their claim through the contractual/departmental mechanism rather than by writ petition, particularly where the claim is essentially monetary.

Sections Involved

  • Article 226, Constitution of India — writ jurisdiction, held inappropriate for this contractual money claim.
  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — the GST/CGST components embedded in the contractual billing, not separately adjudicated.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of without a decision on merits — the petitioner was relegated to the contractual/departmental remedy for his claim, including its GST component.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack
  • Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 11806 of 2023
  • Coram: Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi and Mr. Justice M.S. Raman
  • Date of Order: 4 May 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.