Magnum Management and Services Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India & Ors.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and consent of learned counsel for the parties.

3. The petitioner challenges the impugned communications dated 30 August 2021 and 24 February 2022 declining the petitioner the benefits under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019

4. The impugned communications indicate that the benefit under SVLDRS is declined to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner made payments demanded, allegedly beyond 30 days of the Order dated 27 May 2021 declaring the petitioner as eligible to avail of the benefits under the Scheme. The impugned communications rely on the provisions of Section 127 (5) of Finance Act, 2019-SVLDRS Scheme, 2019 for this purpose.

5. Section 127 (5) deals with the issue of statement by the designated committee inter alia determining the eligibility of the applicant. Such statement was made on 27 May 2021 but it is the case of the petitioner that the same was delivered to the petitioner or was collected by the petitioner only on 31 May 2021. Section 127 (5) provides that declarant shall pay electronically through internet banking, the amount payable as indicated in the statement issued by the designated committee within 30 days from the date of issue of such statement.

6. The record indeed shows that though the statement was prepared on 27 May 2021 the same could be said to have been actually issued on 31 May 2021. Admittedly, the petitioner -declarant, has made the payment electronically on 30 June 2021. Therefore, there was compliance with the requirement of Section 127(5) and on this ground neither can the impugned communications could be issued nor the benefits under the SVLDRS Scheme be denied to the petitioner.

7. Besides, in this case, the petitioner has pleaded that attempts to make payment were made by the petitioner to the determined amount on 25 June 2021 and 26 June 2021, however, due to some technical glitches such payment was not successful.

8. The contention of the petitioner are substantially supported by precedents in Assistant Transport Commissioner v. Nand Singh[1] and D. Saibaba V. Bar Council of India[2] and this will be another ground to allow this petition.

9. Accordingly, we allow this petition, quash and set aside impugned communications dated 30 August 2021 and 24 February 2022 and direct the respondents to issue necessary discharge certificate under SVLDRS Rules, 2019 within four weeks from the date of uploading of this order.

10. In view of the aforesaid grounds, we therefore make the Rule absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) of this petition.

11. All concerned to act on authenticated copy of this order. (Jitendra Jain, J) (M.S. Sonak, J)