IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION Nos.6359, 6381 and 6382 of 2008 WRIT PETITION NO : 6359 of 2008 Between: M/s. ECIL Rapiscan Limited, B-1, Vikrampuri, Secunderabad. Rep by its Senior General Manager (Finance), Sri Vinod Kapoor ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Marredpally Circle, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Commissioner (CT), Begumpet Division, Hyderabad. 3 Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari after calling for the records and quash the impugned revision order passed by the first respondent dated 16-2-2008 passed in Assessment No. 2966/2002-2003/APGST/AG for the assessment year 2003-03 (APGST) or to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: Sri K.RAJI REDDY, SPL.STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX WRIT PETITION NO : 6381 of 2008 Between: M/s. ECIL Rapiscan Limited, B-1, Vikrampuri, Secunderabad, Rep. by its Senior General Manager (Finance) Sri Vinod Kapoor. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Marredpally Circle, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Commissioner (CT) Begumpet Division, Hyderabad. 3 Principal Secretary to Government Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari after calling for the records and quash the impugned revision order passed by the first respondent dt. 19-2-2008 passed in Assessment No. 2966/2003-04/APGST for the assessment year 2003-04 (APGST) or to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the RespondentS: Sri K.RAJI REDDY, SPL.STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX WRIT PETITION NO : 6382 of 2008 Between: M/s. ECIL Rapiscan Limited, B-1, Vikrampuri, Secunderabad, Rep. by its Senior General Manager (Finance) Sri Vinod Kapoor. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commercial Tax Officer, Marredpally Circle, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Commissioner (CT) Begumpet Division, Hyderabad. 3 Principal Secretary to Government Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari after calling for the records and quash the impugned revision order passed by the second respondent dt. 16-1-2008 passed in Rc No. E3/R/111/205-06 for the assessment year 2001-02 (APGST) or to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: Sri K.RAJI REDDY, SPL.STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION Nos.6359, 6381 and 6382 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Since common questions are involved in all these writ petitions, they are being taken up together for disposal. 2. The petitioner herein seeks to assail the orders passed by the 1st respondent in exercise of his powers under Section 20 of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957 by way of Writ of Certiorari. 3. Though several contentions are sought to be urged on merits as well the very jurisdiction to entertain the revision, apart from the liability etc., however the fact remains that the petitioner has got an alternative remedy of appeal as provided under Section 21 of the said Act to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal where he can as well raise all these questions including the plea of jurisdiction. 4. In view of the same we do not find any justification to entertain the writ petition in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petitions are dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy and file appeal within a period of one week from today and take appropriate steps for obtaining the stay orders. Till then, the impugned orders need not be given effect to. 5. Registry is directed to return the original orders. __________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J. __________________ C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J. Date:26.03.2008. GS ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}