IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.123 of 2011 ==================================================== M/S Jay Vijay Co-Operative Construction Corporation, Shyam Nandan Road, Muzaffarpur through its proprietor Bhikhari Prasad Sah, son of Late Ram Khelawan Sah, resident of Shyam Nandan Road, P.S. Town, District- Muzaffarpur. - Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Muzaffarpur. 5. The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Muzaffarpur. 6. The Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Ltd. Manglesh Road, Patna through the Managing Director. - Respondents ==================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner: Mr. V.K.Singh, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Lalit Kishore, AAG-3 ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 4 18.04.2011 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by a Government Contractor to claim interest for the delayed refund of the advance tax deducted. It appears that the matter pertains to the year 1986. Over the years there was a series of litigations where the petitioner succeeded in challenging the rate at which the advance tax was deducted. However, in none of the judgments the Court directed refund of the excess amount with interest. The claim for interest made by the petitioner was 2 rejected by the respondent authority time and again. At last on 27th August 2007 a communication was sent by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes. According to the communication dated 27th August 2007 the interest on the amount of refund would be payable if the claim for refund were not decided within six months. In the case of the petitioner the claim for refund made on 3rd March 2001 was accepted and the refund was made on 30th July 2001 i.e. within less than six months. The question of payment of interest, therefore, did not arise. It may be noted that the aforesaid communication dated 27th August 2007 is addressed to the Private Secretary to the Deputy Chief Minister; probably in answer to a representation made by the petitioner. The communication being neither a legal proceeding nor an order cannot be the subject matter of challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution; certainly not after more than four years. The challenge in the present petition also suffers from the vice of delay, laches and acquiescence and also from the principle of constructive resjudicata. For the aforesaid reasons, this petition is summarily rejected. Bibhash ( R.M. Doshit, CJ.) (Jyoti Saran, J.)