IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 9586 of 2008 Between: K. Mohan Reddy, Engineers & Special Class, Contractors, Plot No. 35, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt of A.P Rep.by its Principal Secretary Finance (Works & Project)Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintendent Engineer (R &B), Vijayawada, Krishna District, 3 The Executive Engineer (R&B), City Roads Division At Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 4 The Executive Engineer (R&B), Roads Division At Goshamahal, Hyderabad. 5 The Pay and Accounts Officer. Ranga Reddy District, Near Gandhi Bhavan, at Nampally, Hyderabad. 6 The Commercial Tax Officer, Malakpet Circle 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 will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring : 1) declaring the Memo No.602/F8(1)/2006 dt.14-3-2007 issued by the 1st respondent in arbitrary, illegal, invalid, contrary to the provisions of the AP Value added Tax Act, Rules made there under, GO Ms. No.'s 11 dt. 29-7-2005 and 141 dt. 27-7-2006, and unsustainable 1) the petitioner is entitled for addition of VAT component of 4% on the entire value of work done at the time of payment of each bill in terms of the provisions of the GO Ms. No. 11 dt. 29-7-2005, and 141 dt. 27-7-2006, and Section 22 (3) of the AP VAT Act, 3) declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 5 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 AP value Added Tax and the Government orders in force as well as the terms of the agreements, and 4) consequently direct the respondents 2 to 5 to pay the difference 2.6% amount on the total value of the work and, and 5) Award costs and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAGHUVEER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos 1 to 5: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SPL. SC FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES. The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per BPR, J) Heard both sides, and at their request, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned Counsel on either side that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.16738 of 2007 (V. VENKATESWARA RAO v. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH), dated 07.08.2007, Following the said judgment, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J Dated: 29.04.2008. sj ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Principal Secretary, Govt of A.P. rep. by its Principal Secretary Finance (Works & Project)Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintendent Engineer (R &B), Vijayawada, Krishna District, 3 The Executive Engineer (R&B), City Roads Division At Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 4 The Executive Engineer (R&B), Roads Division At Goshamahal, Hyderabad. 5 The Pay and Accounts Officer. Ranga Reddy District, Near Gandhi Bhavan, at Nampally, Hyderabad. 6 The Commercial Tax Officer, Malakpet Circle at Hyderabad. 7 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Finance and Planning, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 8. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}