IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO. 23714 of 2008 Between: K.Venkateswarulu, S/o. Venkataiah, R/o. Janatapeta North, Kavali, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Finance & Planning Dept, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle, A.C.Subbareddy Stadium, Dargamitta, Nellore District. 3 The Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division, Kavali, Nellore District. 4 The Assistant Pay & Accounts Officer, Somasila Project, Dargamitta, Nellore District. 5 The Commercial Tax Officer, Kavali, Nellore District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that (1) The Memo NO. 602/F8 (1)/2006 dted 14-3-2007 issued by me the 1st Respondent is arbitrary, illegal, invalid, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Value Added Tax Act, Rules made there under G.O.ms.No. 11 dt. 29-7- 2005 and 141 dt. 27-7-2006, and unsustainable. (2) The Petitioner is entitled for addition of VAT component of4% on the entire value of work done in terms of the provisions of the G.O.Ms.No. 11 dt. 29- 7-2005, 141 dt. 27-7-2006 and Section 22(3) of the A.p. VAT Act. (3) Declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in adding only 1.4% at the time of payment of each bill i.e., lesser than 4% as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Value Added Tax and the Governemtn orders in force as well as the terms of the agreement and. (4) Consequenty direct the respondents 2 to 4 to pay the diﬀerence 2.6% amount to the total value of the work relating to Special Repairs to the Road from K.P. Road to Nekunampeta (Via) Saipeta in Nellore District under the Agreement No. 137/2007-2008 dated 19-2-2008 to the petitioner and to pass such other orderor orders as the Hon'ble Court deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstance of the case as otherwise the petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and hardship and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.H.SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Heard both sides. At their request, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel on either side submitted that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the Judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 484 of 2008 dated 18.01.2008. However, learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes submitted that though the petitioner states that he has paid 4% tax on the entire work done, it has to be ascertained while processing the final bill. Following the ratio laid down in the above referred judgment, the Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed with a direction to the respondents not to remit any further amount in respect of deductions already made pursuant to the Memo dated 14.03.2007 of the ﬁrst respondent, while processing the ﬁnal bill, however, subject to the payment of 4% which is stated to have been made by the petitioner. It is needless to mention, as agreed by the counsel on either side, that the balance of 2.6% has to be added by the respondents in the bills. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari _______________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan October 31, 2008 MAS