JUDGMENT

Siddharth Mridul, J. The present three Appeals raise a common issue and are, consequently, being disposed of by this common order.

2. The brief facts giving rise to FAO(OS) No.674/2010 are as follows:

(a) A contract was entered into between the parties on 28th December, 2000 for construction of a depot and workshop at Shastri Park, Delhi.

(b) The salient features of the said contract dated 28th December, 2000 prescribed Rs.61,87,53,692/- as the total contract price for execution and completion of the work and for remedying the defects therein. The stipulated date for completion of the work was 1st November, 2002.

(c) Thereafter the work was finally completed by the Respondent/Claimant on 29th January, 2006.

(d) Subsequently, disputes arose between the parties for the reason that at the time of making the final payment to the Respondent/Claimant an amount of Rs.57,19,257/- was deducted by the Appellant/Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) towards labour cess and an amount to the tune of Rs.4,08,074/- was accordingly withheld.

(e) In response to the protest by the Respondent/Claimant against the deductions, the Appellant/DMRC vide letter dated 28th August, 2007 conveyed to the Respondent/Claimant that the deductions were made in view of the statutory provisions of the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cess Act') read with the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cess Rules') and the Building and Other Construction Workers' (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BOCW Act'), which provide for deduction to be made at 1% of the gross amount of work done.

(f) The Arbitral Tribunal ruled in favour of the Respondent/Claimant holding that the Appellant/DMRC was wrong in deducting a sum of Rs.57,19,257/- towards labour cess from the final bill payment to be made to the Respondent/Claimant.

(g) The Appellant challenged the Award before the Single Judge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996(hereinafter referred to as the 'A&C Act'). The learned Single Judge upheld the Award of the Arbitral Tribunal stating that the Award had been correctly passed based on the decision of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in Builders Association of India v. Union of India, (2007) 139 DLT 578.

3. The facts as are relevant for the disposal of FAO(OS) No.33/2011 and FAO(OS) No.34/2011 are as follows:

(a) An agreement was entered into between the parties on 28th April, 2001 for construction of Elevated Structure (Viaduct) excluding stations on Tri Nagar-Kohat Enclave Section of Rail Corridor for the Delhi Metro Rail Transport Service Project of RC2B - Lot 1, issued by the PCI - PBI - JARTS - TONICHI - RITES.

(b) The salient features of the subject contract dated 28th April, 2001 provided Rs.72,32,43,172.80 as the total contract price for execution and completion of the work and for remedying the defects therein. The stipulated date for completion of the work was agreed to be 14th January, 2003.

(c) Thereafter the work on the said project was finally completed by the Respondent/Claimant on 31st December, 2003. The final draft bill was submitted by the Respondent/Claimant on 5th November, 2004, pursuant to which a completion certificate was issued by the Appellant/DMRC on 29th March, 2006.

(d) Subsequently, disputes arose between the parties for the reason that at the time of clearing the final payment of the Respondent/Claimant an amount of Rs.74,02,966/- was deducted by the Appellant/DMRC towards labour cess.

(e) In response to the protest by the Respondent/Claimant against the deductions, the Appellant/DMRC vide letter dated 14th January, 2009 conveyed to the Respondent/Claimant that the deductions were made in accordance with the statutory guidelines provided by the Cess Act read with the Cess Rules and the BOCW Act which provide for de