IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 4636 of 2009 Between: M/s. Santhosh Builders Rep by its Managing Partner Smt. B. Bharathi W/o. Late Dasaratha Rami Reddy, R/o. 25-2-515, Chaitanyapuri Colony, Nedyapalem, Nellore. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (CT), Nellore. 2 The Commercial Tax Officer-III, Nellore. 3 The Pay and Accounts Officer, Somasila Swarnamukhi Link Canal Circle, Telugu Ganga Project, Dargamitta, Nellore. 4 Superintendent Engineer, Somasila Swarnamukhi Link Canal Circle, Telugu Ganga Project, Dargamitta, Nellore. .....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 order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in passing the revision proceedings bearing R.V.No. 7/04-05/A6, dated 31-8-2006 and the consequential assessment order passed by the 2nd respondent in G.I. No. 12537/2000-01 dated 07-11-2006 to recover the tax of Rs.31,20,369/- so assessed by attaching the bills that are pending with the 3rd and 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded, violative of principles of natural justice and the provisions of the APGST Act and Rules 1957 apart from violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India and consequently set aside the impugned order of the 1st respondent and further direct the 2nd respondent not to collect the disputed tax of Rs, 31,20,369/- in pursuance of the order of the 1st respondent for the assessment year 2000-2001 from the 3rd and 4th respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. R. RAGHUNANDAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K. RAJI REDDY, SPECIAL STANDING COUNSEL FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Learned advocate for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh petition with additional ground. Permission is granted. The petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for and with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 15-04-2009 bnr