Pending refund claim must be decided in accordance with law, with unjust enrichment considered and merits left open.

A pending refund claim with interest was not decided on merits; the Court directed the competent authority to examine and decide the claim for the relevant period in accordance with law. The authority was also asked to bear in mind the principle of unjust enrichment. The substantive entitlement to refund or interest was left open, and the petition was disposed of by requiring expeditious administrative determination of the pending claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether the pending refund claim with interest should be directed to be decided by the respondents in accordance with law.

Analysis: The refund application was stated to be pending before the department despite a reminder. The dispute was not adjudicated on merits in the writ petition. The Court directed the competent authority to consider and decide the refund claim for the relevant period in accordance with law and to bear in mind the principle of unjust enrichment.

Conclusion: The matter was not decided on the entitlement to refund or interest; the respondents were directed to decide the pending claim expeditiously.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of by requiring administrative determination of the refund claim, leaving the substantive entitlement open.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a refund claim is pending consideration, the Court may direct the competent authority to decide it in accordance with law while leaving the merits open.

---