THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.19220, 19295, 19297, 19314, 19317 of 2010; 9204, 9305, 16105 and 21474 of 2009 Dated 03rd August, 2011 Between: M/s.Larsen and Toubro Ltd., …Petitioner (W.P.No.19220 of 2010) And The Government of A.P., rep.by its Principal Secretary, I & CAD Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents (W.P.No.19220 of 2010) Counsel for the petitioner: Sri G.Nagesh For Sri Y.N.Lohita (W.P.No.19220 of 2010) Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for I & CAD Counsel for respondent No.3: GP for F & P Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri O.Manohar Reddy Counsel for respondent No.3: GP for Panchayat Raj (W.P.No.19220 of 2010) The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: This batch of writ petitions pertains to the validity of the action of the respondents in withholding and deducting 0.25% of the gross bill amounts payable to the petitioners towards the fund for National Academy of Construction. At the hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the parties have submitted that a Division Bench of this Court has dealt with a batch of cases raising similar issues and by its judgment, dated 28.06.2011, in W.A.No.279 of 2009 and batch, upheld the judgments of the learned Single Judges, which were the subject matter of the appeals, by holding that the respondents have no power or authority to deduct any amount, much less 0.25% of the gross bill amounts, towards the fund for National Academy of Construction. Following this judgment, these writ petitions are also allowed. At this stage, it is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, in some of these writ petitions, that during the pendency of the writ petitions, the respondents have deducted the amounts, towards the fund for National Academy of Construction, from the running bills of the petitioners. They have, therefore, requested for a direction to the respondents to refund the amounts so deducted. Since the writ petitions are allowed, it logically follows that the amounts already deducted shall be refunded to the petitioners. A direction in this regard shall go to the respondents to refund the amounts, if any, deducted from the petitioners’ bills during the pendency of these writ petitions. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petitions, the interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 03rd August, 2011 VGB