Kerala High Court
Mary Matha Infrastructure Private ... vs State Of Kerala on 17 March, 2026
2026:KER:22744
WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 38282 OF 2023
PETITIONER :
MARY MATHA INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,
AGED 50 YEARS
BUILDING NO. XVII/180, MARYMATHA SQUARE, ARAKUZHA ROAD,
MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
SIBU CHERIAN, PIN - 686661
BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW (SR.)
SRI.ARUN THOMAS
SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA
SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL
SRI.SHINTO MATHEW ABRAHAM
SRI.ABI BENNY AREECKAL
SRI.MATHEW NEVIN THOMAS
SRI.KURIAN ANTONY MATHEW
SRI.JOE S. ADHIKARAM
RESPONDENTS :
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, SCHEDULED CASTES/SCHEDULED TRIBES DEVELOPMENT
SECRETARIAT, MUSEUM-NANDAVANAM ROAD, NANDAVANAM,
VIKASBHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
2 SPECIAL OFFICER,
GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, YAKKARA, KUNNATHURMEDU P.O.,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678013
3 CHIEF ENGINEER (BUILDINGS),
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC OFFICE COMPLEX, MUSEUM
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
2026:KER:22744
WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023
2
4 SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PWD BUILDINGS, NORTH CIRCLE, PWD
COMPLEX, MANACHIRA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673001
BY SRI.K.V. MANOJ KUMAR, SPL. GOVT. PLEADER.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
23.02.2026, THE COURT ON 17.03.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:22744
WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023
3
P.M. MANOJ, J
------------------
WP(C) No. 38282 of 2023
----------------------
Dated this the 17th day of March, 2026
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is preferred by the Contractor who was awarded the tender for the construction of a hospital block (consisting of a Ward, OT, and OPD) at the Institute of Integrated Medical Sciences, Palakkad Medical College. The bid was accepted at 4% below the estimated rate, and the formal tender agreement was executed between the petitioner and the 2nd and 4th respondents on 30.01.2017.
2. The grievance voiced in this petition pertains to the non- payment of the full contractual amount due to the petitioner, including applicable VAT and GST. Furthermore, the petitioner seeks the reimbursement of the VAT and GST amounts already remitted by them to the authorities.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 4
3. The petitioner contends that, pursuant to Clause 3.10.3 of the tripartite agreement, all duties, taxes, transportation, loading, unloading, and octroi payable by the contractor under the contract or any other cause were to be included in the rates, prices, and the total bid price submitted. Furthermore, all incidentals, overheads, leads, lifts, and carriages required for the execution and completion of the works were also to be incorporated into the bid price. It is pertinent to note that the contract was awarded on 01.10.2016, and the formal agreement was executed on 30.01.2017. At the time of these transactions, the VAT Act was in force. The implementation of the GST regime only occurred subsequently, effective from 01.07.2017.
4. Pursuant to Clause 4(4)(1) of the Ext.P2 tripartite agreement, the contract is defined as an item rate contract, where the rates provided are for the finished work as specified in the contract documents. The contract prices are tentative, based on estimated quantities, and are subject to adjustment based on the actual quantities executed and approved by the Engineer-in-Charge. The contractor acknowledges and agrees that the amount payable is to be assessed on a re-measurable basis in accordance with the tender 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 5 rates. The contractual price shall encompass payment for the supply of all labour (including payments to subcontractors), equipment, materials, plant and machinery, tools, and transportation. It also includes costs for framework, scaffolding, and all works under this contract, as well as applicable taxes--specifically Works Contract Tax (WCT), Value Added Tax (VAT), duties, octroi, levies, royalties, fees, and insurance premiums.
5. The price further includes contributions towards employee benefits (such as ESI and PF), the arrangement of power and water, and all services constituting the scope of work defined under the General Conditions of Contract. Finally, the contract price covers the contractor's establishment costs, infrastructure, overheads, and profits, and includes all costs and expenses necessary for the proper execution and completion of the work in conformity with the contract documents and best engineering practices, and to the satisfaction of the employer.
6. Clause 4.34.1 of the Ext.P2 agreement further stipulates that the contractor shall be liable for, and must pay, all taxes, duties, and levies lawfully assessed against either the owner or the contractor in 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 6 pursuance of the contract. Additionally, the contractor is responsible for all Indian duties, levies, and taxes assessed against them personally regarding income and property. This clause must be read in conjunction with Clause 3.10.3 of the "Instructions to Bidders."
7. As part of the tender process, as per the instructions of the 4th respondent, the petitioner submitted Bill of Quantities (BOQ) rates exclusive of taxes. As shown in Ext.P3, the petitioner submitted an item-rate BOQ following the strict instructions, which stated:
"This BOQ template must not be modified/replaced by the bidder and the same should be uploaded after filling the relevant columns, else the bidder is liable to be rejected for this tender. Bidders are allowed to enter the Bidder Name and Values only."
Accordingly, the petitioner entered the total amount (exclusive of taxes) as Rs.4,25,25,481.50, which the 4th respondent accepted. Since the agreement was executed during the VAT regime, the petitioner remitted the taxes as required by law. However, despite multiple representations spanning over six years, the petitioner has not been reimbursed for these tax payments.
8. The petitioner's claims are further substantiated by Ext.P10, a communication from the Superintending Engineer to the Chief 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 7 Engineer. This document explicitly states that the contract was awarded during the pre-GST era, when the applicable VAT component was only 4%.
9. Following the Government Circular dated 14.12.2017, GST was implemented effective from 01.07.2017. Consequently, the contractor was required to pay GST at 12%, a rate which was further enhanced to 18% effective from 18.07.2022. The communication notes that, pursuant to the Circular dated 15.09.2022, revised administrative sanction for plan and non-plan deposit works may be granted by the Administrative Department without consulting the Finance Department, provided the cost enhancement is solely due to GST rate revisions.
The report details the billing history as follows:
1. Civil Works The contractor has submitted 44th CC bills for civil works, with a total admitted amount of Rs.248,24,13,867/-.
• VAT Period: 4 part bills totalling Rs 48,75,63,654/-.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 8 • GST Period (12%): 35 part bills (CC 5th to 39th) totalling Rs.156,72,92,655/-, with a GST component of Rs.18,80,75,118/.
• GST Period (18%): 5 part bills (CC 40 th to 44th) totalling Rs.42,74,57,638/-, with a GST component of Rs.7,69,42,375/-. • Pending Billing: The balance amount to be billed is Rs.13,46,92,030/-, with a projected GST component of Rs.2,42,44,565/-.
• Total GST (Civil): The cumulative GST for civil works amounts to Rs.28,92,62,059/-.
2. Electrical Works For electrical works, a total of 11 bills have been submitted. • GST Period (12%): 8 bills (CC 1st to 8th) totalling Rs.20,11,23,515/-, with a GST component of Rs.2,41,34,821/-. • GST Period (18%): 3 bills (CC 9th to 11th) totalling Rs.17,14,84,695/-, with a GST component of Rs.3,08,67,245/-. • Pending Billing: The balance amount to be billed is Rs.19,55,84,258/-, with a projected GST component of Rs.3,52,05,166/-.
• Total GST (Electrical): The total GST component for electrical works (on a base of Rs.56,81,92,468/-) amounts to Rs.9,02,07,233/-.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 9
10. As evident from the Ext.P11 communication in April 2023, the Superintending Engineer requested the Chief Engineer to grant revised administrative sanction necessitated by the GST implementation. Pursuant to Circular No. 79/2022/Fin dated 15.09.2022, it was requested that the sanction for "Part A" be enhanced to Rs.356,47,67,657/-, replacing the original amount of Rs.318,52,98,365/-. Consequently, a total revised amount of Rs.375,18,98,241/- was sought in accordance with the rules governing the work.
11. Subsequently, through the Ext.P12 communication, the petitioner requested the release of the additional costs incurred towards GST payments, amounting to Rs.33,88,18,509/-, emphasising that the initial total amount was exclusive of taxes. The petitioner further highlighted that they were suffering significant financial losses due to the mounting interest on GST amounts already paid and those yet to be remitted. To authenticate this claim, the petitioner submitted a Chartered Accountant's (CA) certificate, which confirms that the total GST paid for civil and electrical works between 01.07.2017 and 31.12.2022 amounts to Rs.24,82,41,251/-.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 10
12. Finally, via Ext.P14, the Superintending Engineer informed the Chief Engineer that, in addition to the escalation in material and labour costs, the petitioner had been consistently paying GST for the work executed post-implementation. Based on the report from the Executive Engineer, Buildings Division, Palakkad, it was verified that Rs.24,82,41,251/- had been paid toward GST for running bills during the aforementioned period. The Superintending Engineer cautioned that the contractor might find it difficult to sustain the progress of the work unless the GST compensation was released promptly.
13. In this regard, a meeting was convened under the aegis of the Minister for the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Development Department to discuss the progress of the work and the contractor's demand regarding the GST component. In light of the recommendations by the Secretary of PWD and the Chief Engineer (Buildings), the Chief Engineer was directed to consult with the Finance Department to obtain a revised proposal.
14. Following these discussions, decisions were taken during a meeting held on 19.06.2023. During this meeting, the issue of reimbursement of the GST component was discussed; the PWD 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 11 Secretary and Chief Engineer stated that, based on the agreement and the BOQ, the contractor's request could be admitted. Consequently, the Chief Engineer was directed to provide a revised proposal for further discussion with the Finance Department.
15. Via Ext.P16, the Superintending Engineer again communicated with the Chief Engineer to summarise the request for GST reimbursement, highlighting the consequences of non- reimbursement. On 28.08.2023, the Chief Engineer again wrote to the SC/ST Development Department requesting the reimbursement. In response, the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government sought clarifications on 12 specific items from the Chief Engineer.
16. Subsequently, the Executive Engineer informed the Superintending Engineer that the contractor's request for GST compensation is justifiable based on the agreement and the BOQ and sought a high-level decision in the matter. It was admitted that since the contractor had quoted only the basic rate in the BOQ, the contractor was eligible for GST compensation. Finally, as evidenced in Ext.P21, the Superintending Engineer requested the Chief Engineer to 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 12 address the civil and electrical bills, which comes to a total amount of Rs.32,00,19,560/-.
17. In light of these factual circumstances, counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents are liable to reimburse the GST component as recommended by respondents 3 and 4. In support of this contention, the learned Senior Counsel drew the attention of this Court to various judgments, produced as Exts.P22 and P23, wherein this Court emphasised that the BOQ priority overrides other tender conditions and that a contractor cannot be penalised for submitting rates exclusive of taxes.
18. This Court has also confirmed that GST is an indirect tax, and that the liability for which falls upon the employer. Furthermore, it has been held that where tax is not included in the tender rates, it must be reimbursed. Counsel also pointed out that in EKK Infrastructure Ltd. v. Kerala State Transport Project [WP(C) No. 12471 of 2021], this Court held that the ultimate beneficiary of the services performed is responsible for paying the GST in respect of the work carried out. As the petitioner submitted the bid excluding the 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 13 GST element, it is maintained that the petitioner is entitled to claim GST reimbursement from the respondents.
19. The learned senior counsel also brought to the attention of this Court various other decisions of the Apex Court with respect to the maintainability of the writ petition in contractual matters, which are as follows:
In Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi and Others v. State of U.P. and Others [(1991) 1 SCC 212], it was held that even in contractual matters, the State and its instrumentalities are bound by the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Similarly, in ABL International Ltd. v. Export Credit Guarantee Corpn. of India Ltd. [(2004) 3 SCC 553], the Apex Court held that in cases of arbitrary State action, the High Court may grant relief under Article 226, notwithstanding the contractual nature of the dispute.
Furthermore, in M.P. Power Management Co. Ltd., Jabalpur v.
Sky Power Southeast Solar India Pvt. Ltd. [(2023) 2 SCC 703], the Court affirmed the maintainability of a writ petition seeking the payment of contractual dues from the State.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 14
20. The learned Senior Counsel further drew the attention of this Court to several relevant circulars. Circular No.90/2017/Fin dated 14.12.2017 clarifies that in tender documents, the rates quoted by contractors must be exclusive of GST, though inclusive of all other taxes, duties, and welfare fund contributions. However, the contractor is required to indicate the applicable GST separately in the tender document. It is further clarified that for the purpose of determining the L1 bidder, only the rate exclusive of GST shall be taken into consideration. The circular also stipulates that when bills for goods, services, or works are processed by any government department or agency, payment must be made for the total value of the work plus the applicable GST.
21. Subsequently, Circular No.18/2019/Fin dated 01.03.2019 further clarifies that when finalising the procurement of goods, services, or public works, the total estimated amount should be arrived at exclusive of GST. Similarly, when processing bills, payment must be made to the contractor for the total value of the work at the contract rate plus the applicable GST. Furthermore, the circular clarifies that in the event of a change in the GST rate between the 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 15 date of the invoice and the date of supply (or, in the case of works, between the submission of the tender and the release of payment), the prevailing GST rate, as per Central and State Government laws, shall be reckoned for payment.
22. A further circular issued in 2022, Circular No.79/2022/Fin, clarifies that the GST rates applicable to all works completed and invoices generated before 18.07.2022 shall be at 12% or 5%, as the case may be. Field officers were directed to ensure that for all public works completed under the previous GST regime, the invoice date corresponds to that earlier period. Furthermore, the rates applicable to any public works executed on or after 18.07.2022 shall be 18% or 12%, depending on the nature of the work. In the case of Plan, Non- Plan, and Deposit Works, the Administrative Department may grant revised administrative sanction without consulting the Finance Department, provided the cost enhancement is solely due to the hike in GST rates.
23. Learned Senior Counsel also brought the attention of this Court to Section 15 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 which reads as follows :
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 16 "Section 15. Value of Taxable Supply.-
(1) The value of a supply of goods or services or both shall be the transaction value, which is the price actually paid or payable for the said supply of goods or services or both where the supplier and the recipient of the supply are not re- lated and the price is the sole consideration for the supply. (2) The value of supply shall include-
(a) any taxes, duties, cesses, fees and charges levied under any law for the time being in force other than this Act, the State Goods and Services Tax Act, the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act and the Goods and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Act, if charged separately by the supplier;
(b) any amount that the supplier is liable to pay in relation to such supply but which has been incurred by the recipient of the supply and not included in the price actually paid or payable for the goods or services or both;
(c) incidental expenses, including commission and packing, charged by the supplier to the recipient of a supply and any amount charged for anything done by the supplier in respect of the supply of goods or services or both at the time of, or before delivery of goods or supply of services;
(d) interest or late fee or penalty for delayed payment of any consideration for any supply; and
(e) subsidies directly linked to the price excluding subsidies provided by the Central Government and State Governments.
Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-section, the amount of subsidy shall be included in the value of supply of the supplier who receives the subsidy.
(3) The value of the supply shall not include any discount which is given-
(a) before or at the time of the supply if such discount has been duly rec- orded in the invoice issued in respect of such supply; and
(b) after the supply has been effected, if-
(i) such discount is established in terms of an agreement entered into at or before the time of such supply and specifically linked to relevant invoices; and
(ii) input tax credit as is attributable to the discount on the basis of docu- ment issued by the supplier has been reversed by the recipient of the sup- ply.
(4) where the value of the supply of goods or services or both cannot be deter- mined under sub-section (1), the same shall be determined in such manner as may be prescribed.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 17 (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (4), the value of such supplies as may be notified by the Government on the recommen- dations of the Council shall be determined in such manner as may be prescribed. Explanation. - For the purposes of this Act,-
(a) persons shall be deemed to be "related persons" if-
(i) such persons are officers or directors of one another's businesses;
(ii) such persons are legally recognised partners in business;
(iii) such persons are employer and employee;
(iv) any person directly or indirectly owns, controls or holds twenty-five per cent. or more of the outstanding voting stock or shares of both of them;
(v) one of them directly or indirectly controls the other;
(vi) both of them are directly or indirectly controlled by a third person;
(vii) together they directly or indirectly control a third person; or
(viii) they are members of the same family;
(b) the term "person" also includes legal persons;
(c) persons who are associated in the business of one another in that one is the sole agent or sole distributor or sole concessionaire, howsoever de- scribed, of the other, shall be deemed to be related."
24. In the light of Section 15, it is contended that the GST paid by the petitioner on the construction service is in addition to the contract price quoted in BOQ, which is evident in Ext.P3. As per Section 15 as quoted above, the value of supply is the amount agreed in the contract plus any incidental charges, but exclusive of GST. GST being an indirect tax, the liability to pay is on the employer under the contract. Here, the employer is the 4th respondent, and the owner is the 2nd respondent. Thereby, the contention of the petitioner for the reimbursement of the GST amount is purely consistent with the 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 18 mandate of Section 15. As the GST was over and above the contract price which was not included in the BOQ rates.
25. The 4th respondent has preferred a counter-affidavit. Paragraphs 19 to 22 read as follows :
"19. The letter marked as Exhibit P16 was sent to the 3rd respondent by the 4th respondent in response to the letter No.CEPWD/14604/2021-BL- Part(1) dated 19.07.2023 wherein it was asked to submit a proposal regarding GST compensation claim of the petitioner. In the above letter marked as Exhibit P16, it was delineated that as per instructions regarding GST compensation under Government Order, G.O.(P) No.2/2018/PWD dated 27.01.2018,
i) If the work was completed on or before 30.06.2017 and recorded in the M-Book, only VAT becomes applicable and
ii) If the work was tendered and the agreement was executed before 01.07.2017, but gets completed on or after 01.07.2017, a GST Compensation at 3.50% rate will be paid specifically for Framed Building (New) projects. And in this particular case, the work falls under the second category. The locus standi of the request made by the petitioner to reimburse the difference in tax amounts in VAT and GST regimes was also questioned in the above letter, citing the fact that as per the bidding document, the rate quoted are inclusive of all taxes and this condition was included in the agreement. And the rates mentioned in the bidding document encompass all applicable taxes. The BOQ is an automated sheet in MS Excel formal generated by the e-tenders portal of National Informatics Centre.
20. In response to the letter marked as Exhibit P18 the 3rd 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 19 respondent sought clarification from the 4th respondent regarding queries raised on the above letter. The 4th respondent in the reply letter affirmed that taxes prevailing at the time of tendering were VAT @ 4% & Income Tax @ 2%. On receiving the same from 4th respondent, 3rd respondent submitted the clarification letter to 1st respondent. True copy of the same is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R4(C).
21. The claims of GST reimbursement raised by the petitioner involves huge financial commitments which had to be considered at various levels of Government. It is submitted that all eligible bill payment claims raised by the petitioner have been considered by the Department in a time bound manner. The bills up to 48 & Part bill (Civil) and bills upto CC 15 & Part bill (Electrical) have been passed by the Executive Engineer, PWD Buildings Division, Palakkad and the Executive Engineer, PWD Electrical Division, Thrissur respectively and approved from the office of the 4th respondent and forwarded to the office of 2nd respondent for payment.
22. The claim of petitioner for GST with remarks and contractual conditions noted are now at the consideration of 1st respondent which is yet to be finalised in consultation with law and Finance Department of Government of Kerala."
26. The respondents do not deny the petitioner's contention; however, they maintain that a substantial financial commitment is involved, which must be considered at various levels of the Government. While all eligible claims raised by the petitioner have already been reviewed, the matter is currently under consultation with 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 20 the Finance Department of the Government of Kerala for finalization. The learned Government Pleader further contended that, as evidenced by Ext.P2, Clause 3.10.3 stipulates that all duties, taxes, transportation, loading/unloading charges, and octroi payable by the contractor--or arising from any other cause--shall be included in the rates, prices, and total bid price submitted by the bidder. Furthermore, all incidentals, overheads, leads, lifts, and carriages associated with the execution and completion of the items shall also be included in the rates and total bid price provided by the bidder.
27. The agreement was entered into on 30.01.2017, at which time the petitioner was liable to pay taxes under the VAT regime. Furthermore, Clause 4.4.1 of the agreement specifically stipulates that the contract shall be an item-rate contract, wherein the rates provided for the items are for the finished works as per the contract documents. The contract price is tentative, based on estimated quantities, and is subject to change according to the actual quantities executed and approved by the Engineer-in-Charge. The contractor understands and agrees that the amount payable shall be assessed on a re-measurable basis in accordance with the tendered rates.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 21
28. Similarly, under Clause 4.34.1, the contractor shall be liable for and shall pay all taxes, duties, and levies lawfully assessed against either the owner or the contractor in pursuance of the contract. The Bill of Quantities (Ext.P3) was issued for the purpose of assessing the quantities of materials utilised. Furthermore, as indicated in Exts.P10 and P15, the contentions raised by the petitioner have already been considered by the appropriate authorities.
29. I have heard Sri.Santhosh Mathew, learned Senior Counsel instructed by Smt.Karthika Maria, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.V. Manoj Kumar, learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents.
30. Upon evaluating the factual and legal contentions raised by the learned Senior Counsel against those of the learned Government Pleader, it is evident that under Section 15 of the CGST Act, GST is an indirect tax. The ultimate liability to pay GST rests with the employer. In this instance, the owner of the project is the 2 nd respondent, while the employer is the 4th respondent. Communications marked as Exts.P10, P11, P14, and P16 reiterate this position. Notably, Ext.P16 further details the potential consequences 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 22 of non-payment of the GST amount to the contractor. Furthermore, the minutes of the meeting held under the aegis of the Minister for the SC/ST Development Department (Ext.P15) reflect the recommendations of the Chief Engineer and Executive Engineer regarding the reimbursement of GST to the petitioner. Similarly, the consequential decisions involving the Additional Chief Secretary, the Secretary of the Public Works Department, the Special Officer of Government Medical College, Yakkara, the Director of the SC/ST Department, and the Chief Engineer (PWD Buildings) all acknowledge and admit the validity of the contractor's request for GST reimbursement.
31. Based on the aforementioned factual circumstances and upon examining the findings of this Court in the decisions produced as Exts.P22 to P24, there is no room for doubt regarding the issue at hand. Those decisions categorically state that BOQ priority overrides general tender conditions, and a contractor cannot be penalised for submitting rates exclusive of taxes. It is well-settled that in the case of GST, the reimbursement of taxes need not be expressly included in the tender rates.
2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 23
32. The Government has further confirmed this position through the circulars produced as Exts.P25 to P27. Specifically, Ext.P27, issued by the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance), states that for Plan, Non-Plan, and Deposit works, a revised administrative sanction may be granted by the Administrative Department without consulting the Finance Department, provided the cost enhancement is due solely to a hike in GST rates. In light of this, I find no justification for the 4th Respondent's contention that the matter remains under consideration for finalisation by the Law and Finance Departments.
33. In light of the above observations, the respondents are hereby directed to take effective and immediate steps to reimburse the GST amount paid by the petitioner. This process shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
P.M.MANOJ JUDGE ttb 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 24 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 38282 OF 2023 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER VIDE NO.
G.O. 1349/2016/PWD
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF VOLUME 1 OF THE TRIPARTITE TENDER
AGREEMENT NO.SE(K) 57/2016-2017, DATED
30.01.2017 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE BOQ, SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WHICH IS PART OF THE TENDER AGREEMENT (VOLUME 4).
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD BUILDINGS DIVISION, PALAKKAD, ON 29.03.2017 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PWD SPECIAL BUILDING SECTION, PALAKKAD DATED 18.10.2017 Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.02.2018 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED 06.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 01.10.2020 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, PALAKKAD Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17.03.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD BUILDINGS DIVISION, PALAKKAD.
Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.03.2023 SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 25.04.2023.
Exhibit P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.04.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.05.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 08.05.2023 TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING, ALONG WITH ITS TRANSLATION, DATED 15.06.2023 AT THE 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 25 CHAMBERS OF HON'BLE MINISTER OF WELFARE FOR SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES.
Exhibit P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.08.2023 SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT .
Exhibit P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 28.08.2023. Exhibit P18 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 26.09.2023 .
Exhibit P19 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD BUILDINGS DIVISION, PALAKKAD TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 07.10.2023.
Exhibit P20 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.10.2023 SENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P21 TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED SPLIT OF THE PAYMENTS IN TABULAR FORMAT WITH RESPECT TO VAT TO BE PAID TO THE PETITIONER. .
Exhibit P22 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.12.2019 IN W.A.445 OF 2018 BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA .
Exhibit P23 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT, DATED 13.09.2021, BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) 11662 OF 2021. Exhibit P24 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT, DATED 22.06.2022 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.A. 1710 OF 2021.
Exhibit P25 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.90/2017/FIN, ISSUED BY FINANCE (INDUSTRIES & PUBLIC WORKS B) DEPARTMENT, DATED 14.12.2017.
Exhibit P26 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR, NO. 18/2019/FIN, ISSUED BY THE FINANCE (INDUSTRIES & PUBLIC WORKS B.) DEPARTMENT, DATED 01.03.2019.
Exhibit P27 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR, NO.79.2022/FIN, DATED 15.09.2022, ISSUED BY THE FINANCE (INDUSTRIES & PUBLIC WORKS B.) DEPARTMENT.
Exhibit P28 A TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRAL AWARD IN ARBITRATION CASE NO.1 OF 2018 DATED 31.05.2019 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS Exhibit R4 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE ADDENDUM TO THE NIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOSPITAL BLOCK BUILDING IN GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, PALAKKAD.
Exhibit R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF PRE- BID MEETING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOSPITAL BLOCK BUILDING IN GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, PALAKKAD ExhibitR4 (c) TRUE COPY OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER'S CLARIFICATION LETTER 2026:KER:22744 WP(C)No. 38282 of 2023 26 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P29 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY JOINT SECRETARY ON BEHALF OF SECRETARY, PWD, DATED 07-05-2024 TO SECRETARY, CHIEF ENGINEER, BRIDGES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, Exhibit P30 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 4-6-2024 SHOWING THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF GST DUE TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENTS.
Exhibit P31 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 4-6-2024 SHOWING THE GST DUE IF CALCULATED AT 3.5%.
Exhibit P32 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 4-6-2024 SHOWING THE GST AMOUNT WHICH THE PETITIONER HAS TO PAY.
Exhibit P33 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY PWD DEPARTMENT, DATED 02-08-2024 TO SECRETARY, CHIEF ENGINEER, BRIDGES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.