Facts of the Case

Vasantham Agencies sought a mandamus directing BSNL to furnish statements of account for four work orders and to settle arrears of Rs. 56,21,023. BSNL's counsel produced a tabulated statement showing that, contrary to the petitioner's claim, only Rs. 13,05,072 was actually due, and even this amount had reportedly been adjusted towards GST, bonus bill, EPF, and other deductions but not yet paid.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the disputed arrears amount should be determined by the writ court, given the conflicting figures presented by the petitioner and BSNL.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Payment details had not been furnished, making it impossible to reconcile amounts paid against actual work done across the four tenders; the petitioner sought both the statement of accounts and settlement of Rs. 56,21,023.

Respondent's Arguments

  • BSNL's counsel produced a tabulated statement showing the total amount due and payable was only Rs. 13,05,072, and that even this had been adjusted towards GST, bonus bill, and EPF, with nothing further due.

Court Order / Findings

  • Since the disputed amount involved disputed questions of fact, the Court declined to adjudicate the correct figure itself.
  • It directed BSNL to provide the entire payment details pertaining to the four tenders to the petitioner within four weeks.
  • The petitioner was left at liberty to work out its remedy before the appropriate forum if, after receiving the payment details, it remained dissatisfied.

Important Clarification

GST appears here only as one of several deductions (along with EPF and a bonus bill) that BSNL claimed to have already adjusted against the disputed contract arrears — the Court did not examine or rule on the correctness of that GST adjustment; it simply directed transparency in accounting so the parties (or another forum) could resolve the factual dispute.

Sections Involved

  • Article 226, Constitution of India, 1950 — writ jurisdiction for mandamus.
  • General contract/tender terms governing GST, EPF and bonus adjustments in the work orders (not a standalone GST statute provision).

Decision – In Favour of

Neither party's claimed figure was accepted or rejected; the writ petition was disposed of by directing BSNL to disclose full payment details, leaving the substantive dispute open for the petitioner to pursue elsewhere if unresolved.

Case Details

  • Court: Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court
  • Case No.: W.P.(MD) No. 11068 of 2021
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh
  • Date of Order: 18 October 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.