TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1741
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner had not filed any application for a refund or even raised a demand for justice. Mr Shah admitted that the Petitioner failed to raise any demand for a refund. Typically, this is what the Petitioner should have done. This is a requirement, and not merely a formal procedure, before seeking a writ of mandamus. Therefore, this serves as a reason to refuse the mandamus. 4. A Coordinate Bench in the case of Sansar Texturisers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India W.P. No. 343 of 2024 decided on 22 January 2024, where a mandamus was sought for the refund of anti-dumping duty without a preceding demand for justice, declined to entertain the writ Petition. This decision relies on the rulings of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on this issue. The discussion o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... legal duty to do something or to abstain from doing something." 16. Further, it is also well settled that unless there has been a distinct 'demand for justice' in maintaining a prayer for mandamus, and after such demand being made when the authorities did not act in accordance with the law, only in such event, a prayer for a writ of mandamus would be maintainable. In Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. & Ors. vs. Union of India (1974) 2 SCC 630, the Supreme Court referring to the Halsbury's Laws of England, observed that the powers of the High Court under Article 226 are not strictly confined to the limits to which proceedings for prerogative writs are subject in English practice. The relevant observations of the Supreme Court are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titioner's right, hence, the rule recognized by the Supreme Court in Kamini Kumar Das Choudhury vs. State of West Bengal (1972) 2 SCC 420 that a demand for justice and its refusal must precede the filing of a petition asking for direction or a writ of mandamus, would operate against the petitioners. The relevant observation of the Supreme Court reads thus: "25. In the petition of K.N. Kapur and Others, we do not even find an assertion that any representation was made against any violation of a petitioner's right. Hence, the rule recognized by this Court in Kamini Kumar Das Choudhury vs. State of West Bengal, that a demand for justice and its refusal must precede the filing of a petition asking for direction or writ o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case, there may be issues of unjust enrichment and so on. Therefore, it is important that before a petitioner seeks such relief through a writ of mandamus, there is a demand for justice followed by a refusal. This will give the writ court an idea of the State's defence. The petitioner's claim and the State's defence would bear on the question of exercising discretion to entertain a writ petition for a monetary claim simpliciter. 7. For all the above reasons, we are not inclined to entertain this petition. However, this shall not prevent the petitioner from applying for a refund in accordance with the law, if the law so permits or from raising a demand for justice in accordance with the law. If such an application is made or a demand is ....