Disposed¶28

Satin Goel v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC20 May 2025CWP/8408/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST reimbursement mandamus; speaking order dated 15.05.2025 taken on record as Mark A; GST rate increase 12% to 18%; bill enhanced from ₹ 8,30,653/- to ₹ 9,39,975/-; Engineer-in-Chief, Haryana Public Health Engineering Department, Panchkula; representations dated 29.07.2024 & 06.09.2024 (Annexures P-7 & 8); interim order dated 03.04.2025; payment assured within three months; writ petition closed and disposed of; Justice Kuldeep Tiwari; CWP-8408-2025; decision dated May 20, 2025; petitioner Satin Goel; State of Haryana.

What did the court decide?

No fresh direction issued; the writ petition was closed in view of the respondents' speaking order dated 15.05.2025 (Mark A) deciding the representations and assuring payment of the revised bill within three months. ¶28

Satin Goel Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

113 CWP-8408-2025 Date of Decision : May 20, 2025

SATIN GOEL

-PETITIONER

V/S

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶8

Present: Mr. Manoj Kumar Taya, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Bhupender Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.

¶10

¶11

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

¶12

In deference to the hereinafter extracted order passed by this Court on 03.04.2025, today the learned State counsel has placed on record a speaking order dated 15.05.2025, which is taken on record as ‘Mark A’.

¶13

“The petitioner approached this court for seeking mandamus upon respondents to pay/reimburse the GST amount of ₹ 1,49,118/- to the petitioner, which he has already deposited with the department concerned for the work done by him as per the terms and conditions dated 01.01.2024 (Annexure P-4). He further submits that numerous representations were made to the respondents, however, no action has been taken.

¶14

Notice of motion.

¶15

Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents and waives service.

¶16

He submits that there is no objection in case a mandamus is passed upon respondent No.3, to decide the legal notice of the petitioner in a time bound manner.

¶17

Without observing anything on the actual merits of the case, that whether, the bills of the petitioner are admitted/sanctioned, this Court deems it fit and appropriate to

¶18

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.21 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶19

CWP-8408-2025

¶20

¶21

pass a mandamus upon the respondents concerned, to decide the representations dated 29.07.2024 & 06.09.2024 (Annexures P-7 & 8) within a period of 6 weeks from today, and a copy of the decision, so taken, shall be placed on record, positively, on or before the next date of hearing.

¶22

It goes without saying that in case the competent authority finds that the amount is payable, the same shall be released to the petitioner without any further delay.

¶23

In case the compliance of the aforesaid direction is not made, respondent no.3, shall cause his personal appearance before this Court, on the next date of hearing.

¶24

Adjourned to 20.05.2025.

¶25

To be shown in the urgent list.”

¶26

The speaking order reveals that, owing to increase in the GST rates from 12% to 18%, the amount of the bill has been increased from ₹ 8,30,653/- to ₹ 9,39,975/-. Therefore, the estimate for increased amount has been revised and demand of funds has been made from the Head Office, i.e. Engineer-in-Chief, Haryana, Public Health Engineering Department, Panchkula. It is also disclosed that, the payment of the petitioner will be made within three months.

¶27

In view of the above, since the petitioner’s representations have been decided and the requisite payment is assured to be made within three months from today, therefore, no further direction is required to be passed. Hence, the present writ petition is closed.

¶28

4. Disposed of accordingly.

¶29

May 20, 2025	(KU	LDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE
devinder
Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	:	Yes/No

¶30

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.21 09:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Satin Goel v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satin Goel v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Piara Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Sarvan Cooperative Lc Society Limited Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Shobha Jolly Vs the Union Territory, Chandigarh and Others

M/S Mathra Dass Ahuja and Sons Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ram Rup Malik Vs State of Haryana and Others

Devender Kumar Chauhan and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others