IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.4970 of 2009 ====================================================== Ram Shankar Singh , son of Late Shiv Narayan Singh, resident of Ashram Road, P.O. and P.S. Raxaul, District East Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar , through the Finance Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Raxaul Circle, Raxaul, District East Champaran. 5. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar. 6. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar. 7. The National Highway Authority, Ministry of Surface Transport, Govt. of India. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Samdarshi For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pyush Lal, A.C. to A.A.G. 1 Mr. Rabindra Prayadarshi, A.C. to A.A.G. III For N.H.A.I. : Mr. Sunil Kumar Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 14 12-07-2011 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed Patna High Court CWJC No.4970 of 2009 (14) dt.12-07-2011 2 by a contractor for redressal of his grievance in respect of refund of the amount of sale tax paid by him in excess for the period from 1st November 1985 to 18th December 1991. The petitioner was a works contractor. During the relevant period, the petitioner had handled certain government projects. Out of the contractual amount payable to the petitioner, certain amount was deducted at source by the State Government. On assessment of the tax liability, the amount deducted at source was larger than the tax liability of the petitioner. The petitioner was, therefore, entitled to refund of Rs. 63,764.50. As the aforesaid amount of refund was not paid to the petitioner, he has filed above C.W.J.C. No.4970 of 2009 under Article 226 of the Constitution. Learned advocate Mr. Suraj Samdarshi has appeared for the petitioner. He has submitted that pending this petition during the months of November 2009, January 2010 and July 2010 a sum of Rs. 58102/- has been paid to the petitioner. It is now the grievance of the petitioner that besides the aforesaid sum of Rs. 58102/- remaining sum of around Rs. 6000/- is yet to be paid. The petitioner has not been paid the statutory interest for the delay in refund. The petitioner is still entitled to a refund of around Rs. 6000/- and the statutory interest over the amount of refund @ nine per cent per annum as envisaged by Section 43 of the Bihar Patna High Court CWJC No.4970 of 2009 (14) dt.12-07-2011 3 Finance Act, 1981. Learned advocate Mr. Pyush Lal has appeared for the respondents. He does not dispute the aforesaid proposition. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed. The writ petitioner will be paid the remaining amount of refund of around Rs. 6000/- and the statutory interest within one month from today. The amount statutory interest, as envisaged by Section 43 of the Bihar Finance Act, over the aforesaid amount of Rs. 58102/- will be paid to the petitioner within two months from today. In the event, the respondents fail to make payment of the amount of refund and interest as directed hereinabove, the entire amount of refund will carry an additional interest @ six per cent per annum commencing from the date of this order till the date of payment. Basudeo Tiwary/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)