IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.3892, 3894, 3895, 3896, 4125, 5066, 5144, 5233, 5742, 7608, 8582, 9685, 9720, 11722, 11723, 11724 and 11727 of 2005 W.P.No.3892 of 2005 Between: M/s. Sujana Constructions, Rep. by its Managing Partner- R.Ram Mohan Rao S/o. Papa Rao, 52 years, R/o. 1-10-149, Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Roads & Buildings Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings Circle, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 3 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Division, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 4 The Chief Engineer, Roads & Buildings, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 5 Pay and Accounts Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, Order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents not to collect enhanced seigniorage charges from the petitioner in respect of all items in execution of contract works covered under the agreement and refund the enhanced seigniorage fee deducted from the bills of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 3894 of 2005 Between: S. Krishna Rao S/o Rama Rao, Special Class Contractor, R/o H. No. 1-2-270/103/A/2 K.K. Road, Suryapet, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Division Nalgonda, Nalgond District. 3 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Division Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District. 4 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings Circle, Nalgonda, Nalgnonda District. 5 The Chief Engineer, Roads & Buildings, NABARD, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 6 The Chief Engineer, Roads & Buildings Roads, Hyderabad. 7 Pay Accounts Officer, G.V. Garden Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 8 Assistant Pay and Accounts Officer, Ranga Reddy Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents not to collect enhanced seigniorage charges from the petitioner in respect of all items in Execution of contract works covered under the agreement and refund the enhanced seigniorage fee deducted from the bills of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 3895 of 2005 Between: M/s.Sujana Constructions, rep., by its Managing Partner, R.Ram Mohan Rao, S/o Papa Rao, R/o.1-10-149, Ashoknagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Roads & Buildings Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings Circle, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 3 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Division, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 4 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Division, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District. 5 The Chief Engineer, Roads & Buildings Roads, Hyderabad. 6 Pay and Accounts Officer, G.V.Garden, Nalgonda, Nalgonda 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents not to collect enhanced seigniorage charges from the petitioner in respect of all items in execution of contract works covered under the agreement and refund the enhanced seigniorage fee deducted from the bills of the Petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 3896 of 2005 Between: M/s. Sujana Constructions, Rep by its Managing Partner-R.Ram Mohan Rao, S/o. Papa Rao, aged 52 years, R/o. 1-10-149, Ashoknagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Roads & Buildings Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings Circle, Warangal, Warangal District. 3 The Executive Engineer, Special Execution Division, Mahaboobabad, Warangal District. 4 The Chief Engineer, Roads and Buildings Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 5 Pay and Accounts Officer, Chintagattu, Hanamkonda, Warangal 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents not to collect enhanced seigniorage charges from the petitioner in respect of all items in execution of contract works covered under the agreement and refund the enhanced seigniorage fee deducted from the bills of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 4125 of 2005 Between: M/s. Srinivasa Reddy Constructions rep by Managing Partner D. Srinivasa Reddy, S/o Subbi Reddy, R/o.Srikakulam, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings, Seethammadhara, Visakhaptnam District. 2 The Executive Engineer, South Division, Roads & Buildings, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District. 3 The Pay & Accounts Officer, Srikakulam, Srikakulam 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus" declaring the action of the Respondents in seeking to apply the seigniorage charges in accordance with G.O. Ms. No.217, dt.29-09-2004 and respective of the work entrusted to the petitioner called NABARD-RIDF.IX- Improvements to NH.5 to Surampeta (Via) Narava, Mentada from KM 2/0 to 12/0 in Srikakulam District, an agreement was also entered into with petitioner by the 1st respondent for the execution and completion of the above work vide agreement C.R. No. 23/2004-05 dt.26-06-2004 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to recover the Seigniorage Charges in accordance with the charges mentioned in the agreement or in the alternative to charge the enhanced rates to the value of the estimate. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Ch.SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 5066 of 2005 Between: M/s.Real Constructions, rep., by its Managing Partner Md.Kamaluddin, S/o Rafiyuddin, R/o Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings Circle, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 2 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 3 The Pay & Accounts Officer, LMD Colony, Karimnagar, Karimnagar 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of "writ of mandamus" declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to apply the Seigniorage charges in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.217, dt.29-09-2004 and respective of the work entrusted to the petitioner called construction of High Level causeway at KM 13/5 of Koheda to Devakkapally viz. Ramachandrapuram Road, Karimnagar District to an agreement was also entered into with petitioner by the 1st respondent for the execution and completion of the above work vide agreement L.S.Agreement No.64/2004-2005 dt.17-6-2004, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to recover the Seigniorage charges in accordance with the charges mentioned in the agreement or in the alternative to charge the enhanced rates to the value of the estimate. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Ch.SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 5114 of 2005 Between: M/s. Sri Venkateswara Balaji Constructions, Buchireddypalem, Nellore. Rep. by its M.D. D. Subba rao S/o. Satyanarayana, aged 48 yrs, R/o. Guntur. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer (Roads & Buildings) Circle, Guntur. 2 The Executive Engineer (Roads & Buildings) Tenali, Guntur District. 3 The Chief Engineer (Nabard), Errummanzil, Hyderabad. 4 The Pay & Accounts Officer (W & P) Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to collect enhanced seigniorage charges from the petitioners in respect of all items in execution of contract works covered under the agreement dt.2-9-04, 2.9.04, 9-9-04 and 9-9-04 and refund the enhanced seigniorage fee deducted from the bills of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 5233 of 2005 Between: M/s. Adishakthi Constructions, 11-1-8/57/A, Beside Lakshmi Kalyana Mantapam, Nizamabad, rep. through its Managing Partner, L. Manohar Rao. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Supt., Engineer, Roads & Bldgs, N.H. Circle, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 2. The Executive Engineer ( R&B), N.H. Division No.2, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or Writs, Order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in Seeking to recover Seigniorage charges from the petitioner firm as per G.O.Ms.No.217 dt.29.9.2004 in respect of the work entrusted to the petitioner, Viz. P.R. on Narpur-Hyderabad Section of NH 7 from KM 370/0 to 371/0, KM 372/0 to 374/0, KM 382/4 to KM 384/0, KM 386/0 to 387/6 and KM 309/6 to 391/6", pursuant to the Agreement No. 15/2004-2005 dt.22.9.2004 as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and to consequently direct the Respondents to recover Seigniorage charges from the petitioner only in accordance with the charges mentioned in the contract entered vide Agreement dt.22.9.2004 in Agreement No.15/2004-2005. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.RAGHUVEER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV. WRIT PETITION NO : 5742 of 2005 Between: P. Venkateswara Reddy, S/o. P. Lali Reddy, R/o. Devanabanda Village, Pathikona Mandal, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Roads & Buildings Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Division, Kurnool, Near Raj Vihar Centre, Kurnool District. 3 The Pay and Accounts Officer, Housing Board Complex, Abbas Nagar, Kurnool 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 may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in insisting for payment and collection of enhanced seigniorage fee in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.217 dated 29-9-2004 in respect of the works done by the petitioner namely i) Urgent repairs to low burns in KM 84/0 to 90/0 Kurnool Bellary Road; ii) urgent repairs to road works in KM 15/0 to 16/2 and 3/0 to 7/0 of Billekal, Yemmiganoor road; iii) Urgent repairs to sectioning burns KM 50/0 to 57/0 of Gooty, Pathikonda, Adoni Road, As bad in law, arbitrary, contrary, contrary to the terms of agreement and high handed and consequently direct the respondent not insist or deduct the enhanced seigniorage from the bills/payments of the petitioner submitted for the works done by him by strictly following the terms of agreement entered into by the second respondent with the petitioner and to refund the fee if any already deducted from the bills. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.RAMALINGESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 7608 of 2005 Between: M/s. Sai Krishna Constructions, rep. by its Managing Partner M.Sivaramu, S/o.Sri Laxminarayana, R/o.Yellareddy Village and Mandal, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Roads Wings (PW), Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyd. 2 The Superintendent Engineer, R&B., Niazamabad, Nizamabad District. 3 The Executive Engineer, R&B., Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 4 The Pay and Accountant Officer, Nizamabad, Nizamabad 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 may be pleased to issue an order or a direction or a writ more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioners case for reimbursement of excess seigniorage charges over and above the rates stipulated in the agreement as illegal and arbitrary in respect of the works of the agreement in Agreement No.88/2003-2004 dt.31.12.2004 relating to the NABARD -RIDF-Improvements to Yellareddy to Gandivet via Vellutla road from KM o/o to 15/7 in Nizamabad District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.PRATAP REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 8582 of 2005 Between: C. Eswar Reddy & Company, Special Class Contractors, Rep. by its Partner K. Ramakrishna Reddy, S/o. K,. Pulla Reddy, aged about 35 years, Flat No. 108, A-Block, Nizampet Road, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Executive Engineer, R & B Division, Kurnool 2 The Executive Engineer, R & B Division, Nandyal, Kurnool District, 3 The Executive Engineer, R & B Division, Adoni , Kurnool District, 4 The Executive Engineer, R & B Division, N.H. Division, Kurnool . 5 The Pay & Accounts Officer, Housing Board Complex, Abbas Nagar, Kurnool. 6 The Asst. Pay & Accounts Officer, R & B Division, Nandyal, Kurnool District. 7 The Superintendent Engineer, R & B Division, Kurnool .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, Order or direction mostly one which is in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to apply the seigniorage charges as per G.O.Ms.No.217 dt.29.9.2004 in respect of the works entrusted to the petitioner company which are (a) Improvements to road form Kosigi to Kachapuram Road (via) Sajjalagudem, Jampapuram, from K.M. 0/0 to 13/6 in Adoni Division, Kurnool vide Agreement no,. 194/2003-2004. (b) Improvements to road from Kuppagal - Halvi road via Urukunda from KM 0/0 to 18/0 in Kurnool District vide agreement No. 211/2003-2004. (c) Improvements to road from Devanakonda to Marella from KM 0/0 to 10/0 in Kurnool District, (d) Improvements to road from, KM 0/0 to 10/0 in Plannapuram Village in Kurnool District. (e) Special repairs to road from 233/0 to 240/0 and 267/0 to 269/0 and 277/0 to 278/0 of NH 7 of Hyderabad - Bangalore Road. (f) Heavy periodic Maintenance to carriageway of Kalva - Betamcherla - Banaganapalli road from KM 0/0 to 26/0 in Kurnool District as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Art, 14 and 21 of Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents to recover the seigniorage charges in accordance with the charges mentioned in the contract document or in the alternative to charge the enhanced rates to the value of the estimate by revising the rates. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 9685 of 2005 Between: K. Sanjeeva Reddy, s/o. Papi Reddy, H.No. 2-6-1050, K.L.N. Reddy Colony, Hanumakonda Warangal. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer ( R & B), Nizamabad Circle, Nizamabad. 2 The Executive Engineer, R&B Division, Siddipet. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to Issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in recovering the enhanced seigniorage fee under G.O.Ms.No.217 dt.29.9.2004 in respect of L.S. Agreement No.39/2004-05 dt.2.9.2004 executed between the petitioner and the respondents as illegal and void and consequently declare that the petitioner is liable to pay only seigniorage fee mentioned in L.S.Agreement No.39/2004-05dt. 2.9.2004 in respect of Improvements to the road from Ibrahimpur to Dubbak from KM o/o to 16/0 in Medak District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.RAMALINGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 9720 of 2005 Between: Ch. Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Sriram Murthy, R/o. H.No.8-6, Challapally Complex, Warangal "X"Road, Khammam Town and District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Pay and Accoutns Officer, Tekulapally, Khammam District. 2 The Superintending Engineer, R&B Circle, Khammam, Khammam District. 3 The Executive Engineer, R& B Circle, Khammam, Khammam District. 4 The Exeucitve Engineer, R & B, Sub Division, Kothagudem, Khammam District. 5 The Executive Engiener, R & B Sub Division, Bhadrachalam, Khammam 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 may be pleased to Issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to collect enhanced seigniorage charges from the petitioner in respect of all items in execution of contract works covered under the agreement and refund the enhanced seigniorage fee deducted from the bills of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT, ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 11722 of 2005 Between: M/s.SRK Constructions & Projects Pvt.Ltd., rep.by its Managing Director, Sri S.Ravi Kumar, S/o.Sanjeeva Reddy, R/o.H.No.2-695, Eswar Singh Road, Nagarajpet, Kadapa-1. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, APRDC & EX-Officio Chief Engineer, (R&B) EAP, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer (R&B) Circle, Kadapa, Kadapa Dist. 3 The Executive Engineer (R&B), Pulivendula, Kadapa Dist. 4 The Executive Engineer (R&B) R&B Division, Kadapa, Kadapa Dist. 5 The Executive Engineer (R&B) Proddutur, Kadapa Dist. 6 The Pay & Accounts officer, Kadapa, Kadapa 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to apply the seigniorage charges as per G.O.Ms.NO.217 (Industries & Commerce (MI) Department dated 29-9-2004 in respect of the works entrusted to the petitioner company viz., (a) C.R.Agreement No.78/2004-05 dated 18-11-2004 (b) C.R. Agreement NO.73/2003-04 dated 8-10-2003, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to recover the seigniorage charges in accordance with the charges mentioned in the contract document as per the instructions issued in circular Memo NO.TA7/Courts/AEE.8/16541/2000, dated 31-1-2005 issued by the chief Engineer (R&B) Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.R.SASIDHARAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 11723 of 2005 Between: M/s SRK Constructions and Projects Pvt, Ltd., rep by its Managing Director, Sri S.Ravi Kumar, S/o.Sanjeeva reddy R/o.H.No.2-695, Eswar Singh Road, Nagarjpet, Kadapa-1. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer (R&B) Circle National High Ways Circle, Ananthapur, District. 2 The Executive Engineer (R&B) National High Ways Kadapa, Kadapa 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to apply the Seigniorage charges as per G.O.Ms.No.217, (Industries and Commerce (M1) Department Dt.29.9.2004 in respect of the works entrusted to the petitioner company Viz., C.R.Agreement No.34/2004-05 dt.22.1.2005, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to recover the seigniorage charges in accordance with the charges mentioned in the contract document as per the instructions issued in circular Memo No.TA7/Courts/AEE.8/16541/2000 dt.31.1.2005 issued by the Chief Engineer (R&B) Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.R.SASIDHARAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 11724 of 2005 Between: M/s.SRK Constructions & Projects Pvt.Ltd., rep.by its Managing Director, Sri S.Ravi Kumar, S/o.Sanjeeva Reddy, R/o.H.No.2-695, Eswar Singh Road, Nagarajpet, Kadapa-1. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, aprdc & EX-Officio Chief Engineer, (R&B) EAP, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer (R&B) Circle, Kadapa, Kadapa Dist. 3 The Executive Engineer (R&B), Pulivendula, Kadapa Dist. 4 The Executive Engineer (R&B) R&B Division, Kadapa, Kadapa Dist. 5 The Executive Engineer (R&B) Proddutur, Kadapa Dist. 6 The Pay & Accounts officer, Kadapa, Kadapa 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to apply the seigniorage charges as per G.O.Ms.NO.217 (Industries & Commerce (MI) Department dated 29-9-2004 in respect of the works entrusted to the petitioner company viz., (a) C.R.Agreement No.2/APERP/2004-05 dated 27-5-2004, (b) C.R. Agreement NO.38/2003-04 dated 4-7-2003,and (c) C.R.Agreement No.77/2004-05 dated 3-11-2004, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to recover the seigniorage charges in accordance with the charges mentioned in the contract document as per the instructions issued in circular Memo NO.TA7/Courts/AEE.8/16541/2000, dated 31-1-2005 issued by the chief Engineer (R&B) Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.R.SASIDHARAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS WRIT PETITION NO : 11727 of 2005 Between: M/s SRK Constructions and Projects Pvt., Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director, Sri S.Ravi Kumar, S/o.Sanjeeva Reddy R/o.H.No.2-695, Eswar Singh Road, Nagarajpet, Kadapa. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer (R&B) Circle, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2 The Executive Engineer ((R&B) Division, Adoni, Kurnool District. 3 The Pay and Accounts Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to apply the Seigniorage charges as per G.O.Ms.No.217, (Industries and Commerce (MI) Department Dt.29.9.2004 in respect of the works entrusted to the petitioner company Viz., Agreements (a) C.R.Agreement No.204./2003-04, dt.20.10.2003, (b) C.R.Agreement No.206/2003-04 dt.23.1.2004, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondents to recover the Seigniorage charges in accordance with the charges mentioned in the contract document as per the instructions issued in circular Memo No.TA.7/Courts/AEE.8/16541/2000 dt.31.1.2005 issued by the Chief Engineer (R&B) Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.R.SASIDHARAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.3892, 3894, 3895, 3896, 4125, 5066, 5114, 5233, 5742, 7608, 8582, 9685, 9720, 11722, 11723, 11724 and 11727 of 2005 COMMON ORDER: All the Writ Petitions are filed by special class civil contractors registered with Government of Andhra Pradesh. They are aggrieved by the action of Roads & Buildings Department Engineers in seeking to recover from the bills submitted by the petitioners, the seigniorage fee at enhanced rates as enhanced by Government in notification issued under Section 15(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (for short, the Act) vide G.O.Ms.No.217, dt.29.9.2004. This Court initially granted interim orders in some cases in which the Government came forward with applications for vacating the interim orders. At that stage, all the matters were directed to be listed, heard finally and are being disposed of by this common order. To appreciate the controversy the facts in W.P.No.3892 of 2005 may be noticed as an illustrative case. The petitioner, M/s.Sujana Constructions, was awarded the work of improving the road from Km.31/0 to 41/0 at Kalyandurg Nagepalligate Road, via Kundurpi. The agreement between the petitioner and the