Full Judgment
1 W.P.No.10101/2012 W.P.No.10102/2012 23.7.2012 Shri Sudhir Shrivastava, Counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.A.Dharmadhikari, Counsel for respondent No.2.
This order shall decide W.P.No.10101/12-Arun Shrivastava versus Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation LTD.& another and W.P.No.10102/12-M/s Akanksha Constructions versus Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation LTD.& another in which similar prayer is made on the basis of similar set of facts.
For the convenience, facts are taken from W.P.No.10101/12.
Petitioner has sought following reliefs:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court be please to direct the respondent No.1 to decide the representations submitted by the petitioner regarding the settlement and liability of the Service Tax, in the interest of justice.”
The case of the petitioner is that in respect of imposition of service tax, petitioner is having some grievance and in this regard, petitioner had made a representation with respondent No.1.
It was submitted by Shri Shrivastava that earlier representations are still pending before the respondent No.1 since last nearabout 8 months, but without any decision.
It was submitted that respondent No.1 be directed to decide the representation expeditiously.
Shri S.A.Dharmadhikari, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has no objection, if the respondent No.1 is directed to decide the representation.
Shri Sudhir Shrivastava, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that he has already supplied copy of these petitions to Shri P.K.Kaurav, standing counsel for respondent No.1.
Considering short grievance of the petitioners seeking direction against respondent No.1 for consideration of their representation, we find it appropriate to dispose of these petitions finally with following directions:- 2 W.P.No.10101/2012 W.P.No.10102/2012 23.7.2012 (i) Petitioners may file a fresh representation before the respondent No.1 agitating their grievance supported by necessary documents and a copy of the petition for ready reference of the respondent No.1.
(ii) Respondent No.1 on receipt of the representation shall consider and decide it expeditiously as far as possible within a period of one month from the date of receipt of such representation.
No order as to costs.
C.C.as per rules.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) Judge Judge C.