HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11958 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Pramod Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri S.K. Khare, learned Standing Counsel appearing for all the respondents. 2. By means of the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 24.12.2024 passed by Cess Assessment Authority/Cess Collector/Assistant Labour Commissioner, Hardoi whereby, the recovery of Rs.3,65,000/- has been ordered to be made from the petitioner under the UP Building & Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 03.06.2024, the petitioner could not submit a reply to the same due to certain constraints. The impugned order has been passed assessing the amount of cess as Rs.2,50,000/- treating the cess value of construction to be Rs.2,00,00,000/- A copy of a certificate regarding cost of construction issued by Government approved valuer on 02.08.2024 has been annexed as Annexure No.6 to this petition, as per which, the estimated cost to construction of the building is Rs.97,96,000/-. 4. The impugned order does not make a reference to the manner, in which, the authority concerned has assessed the cost of construction Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pramod Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Naresh Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru District Magistrate Hardoi And Ors. .....Respondent(s) before passing the order. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that although, the impugned recovery order refers to the assessment order dated 30.07.2024, the same has been served upon the petitioner. 6. The learned Standing Counsel has opposed the present petition and has submitted that the petitioner has not responded in spite of repetitive opportunities having been granted to him. However, he could not point out the manner, in which, the assessing authority has assessed the construction value for calculating the amount of cess payable by the petitioner. 7. In such circumstances, it appears to be just and proper to give another opportunity to the petitioner to present his case regarding value of construction for assessing the amount of cess payable thereon. 8. Accordingly, the present petition stands allowed and the impugned order dated 30.07.2024 (referred to in the recovery certificate dated 24.12.2024) as well as the recovery certificate dated 24.12.2024 (annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition) is hereby set aside. 9. The matter is remanded to respondent no.2- Cess Assessment Authority/Cess Collector/Assistant Labour Commissioner, Hardoi. The petitioner will submit an application giving particulars of cost of construction along with evidence as well as certified copy of this order before the respondent no.2, within a period of two weeks from today, whereupon, the cost of construction shall be assessed afresh and a fresh order shall be passed, in accordance with law. December 11, 2025 V. Sinha WRIC No. 11958 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench