SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Jhk) 433

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI 
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JJ.
The Jharkhand Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board., through its Secretary namely Rakesh Prasad, S/o. Late Krishna Prasad – Appellant
Versus
M/s Anvil Cables Private Limited a Private Limited, through its constituted Attorney, Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, son of Shri Ravindra Nath Singh and Ors. – Respondents
L.P.A. No.497 of 2024 with L.P.A. No.495 of 2024 with L.P.A. No.496 of 2024 with L.P.A. No.506 of 2024 with L.P.A. No.507 of 2024 with L.P.A. No.508 of 2024 with L.P.A. No.509 of 2024 with L.P.A. No.566 of 2024
Decided On : 09-05-2025


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate:Mr. Jayesh Anand, Advocate
For the Resp. :Mr. M.S. Mittal, Sr. Advocate Mr. Salona Mittal, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Apoorva Singh, AC to SC (Mines)-II
For JUVNL :Mr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. S.C. Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, Advocate: Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. S.C

The Labour Cess cannot be deducted from supply contracts under the Cess Act, as established by statutory provisions and relevant case law.

Headnote:(A) Building & Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 - The Labour Cess cannot be deducted from the supply of materials as per the statutory provisions and the judgment in Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Limited v. CG Power & Industrial Solutions Limited, (2021) 6 SCC 15. (Paras 7, 44, 52)

(B) Necessary Party - The Labour Commissioner, who is also the Chairman of the Board, was a party to the proceedings, thus the argument of non-impleadment of the Board lacks merit. (Paras 36, 40)

(C) Unjust Enrichment - The principle of unjust enrichment does not apply when deductions are made contrary to statutory provisions. (Paras 51, 52)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Company engaged in government contracts, challenged the deduction of Labour Cess on supply contracts under the Cess Act, claiming it was illegal. The learned Single Judge ruled in favor of the petitioner, ordering a refund of the deducted amount.

Findings of Court:
The deductions made were contrary to the statutory provisions, and the Labour Commissioner was adequately represented in the proceedings.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Board was a necessary party and the applicability of unjust enrichment principles.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Labour Cess cannot be deducted from supply contracts, and the Labour Commissioner’s dual role did not necessitate the Board's impleadment.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

Prayer Since all the appeals are having the common issues, as such, these appeals are directed to be heard together and are being disposed of with this common order.

2. The instant appeals preferred under Clause-10 of Letters Patent are directed against the order dated 09.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Review Nos.22 of 2024 and analogous cases, whereby and whereunder, the prayer to recall/review the orders passed by the learned Single Judge on different dates, i.e., in W.P.(C) Nos.5775 of 2023, 5777 of 2023, 5776 of 2023, 5778 of 2023, 6695 of 2023, 6262 of 2022 and 5458 of 2023 have been dismissed.

3. Since the issue involved in all these Letters Patent Appeals are identical in nature, as such, for the sake of convenience and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the fact involved in one of the cases, i.e., LPA No.497 of 2024 is being taken up.

Factual Matrix

4. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the petition, required to be enumerated, which read as under:

(i) It is the case of the writ petitioner that writ petitioner is a Company engaged in business of workers contract of the Government and was awarded contract for the tender for Rural Electrification Works of West Singhbhum District under Din Dayal Upadhyay Gram Jyoti Yojna project in XIIth plan pursuant to NIT No.277/PR/JBVNL/2018-19.

(ii) The writ petitioner was selected as the successful bidder, two separate orders were issued in his favour which are as follows:-

I. Letter of Award for supply of materials being LOA No.156/RE dated 17.12.2019.

II. Letter of Award for erection and civil works being LOA No.157/RE dated 17.12.2019.

(iii) The main grievance of the petitioner-Company is that the Letter of Award for supply of materials is defined as the “First Contract/Supply Contract” and the Letter of Award for erection works is defined as the “Second Contract”/Erection Contract. In fact, clause-2 of both the LOAs read as (a) “total for supply contract-Rs.46,71, 54,701.88”, and (b) “total for service contract-Rs.9,96,37,316.01”. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that the contracts for supply of materials and erection were separate and divisible contracts. Further, it has been stated by the writ petitioner that the total amount of labour cess deducted was Rs.32,59,088/-. Apart from this, there were other purchase and work order on which cess has been deducted by respondent-JBVNL and aggrieved by said deduction, the Writ Petition has been filed.

5. It is evident from the factual aspect that the writ petitioner, has preferred writ petitions, i.e., W.P.(C) Nos.5775 of 2023, 5777 of 2023, 5776 of 2023, 5778 of 2023, 6695 of 2023, 6262 of 2022 and 5458 of 2023, which have been allowed passing the order for refund of the amount which has been deducted by way of labour cess by the Jharkhand Urja Vitran Nigam Limited, in short “JUVNL”.

6. The writ petitioner has preferred writ petitions impleading therein the respondents, i.e., (i) State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Labour, Employment & Training, having its office at Sharam Bhawan, Doranda, Ranchi.

(ii) Labour Commissioner, Department of Labour, Employment & Training, having its office at Sharam Bhawan, Doranda, Ranchi.

(iii) Assistant Labour Commissioner-cum-Cess Assessment Officer, having its office at Sharam Bhawan, Doranda, Ranchi.

(iv) Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, through its Managing Director, having its office at Engineering Building, HEC, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

(v) General Manager (Project & Financial Management), Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited, having its office at Engineering Building, HEC, Dhurwa, Ranchi seeking therein the following prayers:-

“(i) For the issuance of an appropriate writ / order / direction or a writ in the nature of a declaration, declaring that the Respondents can deduct Labour Cess under the Cess Act (defined hereinafter) only on the erection charges which involves engagin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top