N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO.25667 of 2008 Between: M/s. Systematic Engineering Services Rep. by its Proprietor, Sri K.L.B. Chowdary, D.No. 49-16-5/1, Lalitha Nagar, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam - 530 016. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Commercial Tax Officer Dwaraka Nagar Circle Visakhapatnam. 2 The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Dwaraka Nagar Circle Visakhapatnam. 3 The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) Visakhapatnam. 4 The Branch Manager South India Bank Ltd. Visakhapatnam Branch, Suryabagh, Beside Vaartha Office, Visakhapatnam - 530 020. ...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 Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction declaring the action of the 1st & 2nd respondents in issuing the Garnishee notice, dated 14-10-2008 and Form - I, dated 22-09-2008 as arbitrary, contrary to law and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently grant stay of collection of disputed demand of Rs.4,78,481/- for the assessment year 2004-05, pending disposal of the appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Visakhapatnam, the 3rd respondent herein. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SHAIK JEELANI BASHA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZUL PURKAR WRIT PETITION NO.25667 of 2008 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax for the respondent. At their request, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. The grievance of the petitioner is against the recovery being affected pending the substantive appeal on the file of the first respondent, as against the order impugned. Though substantial amounts have been paid, the respondents are proceeding to recover the same. Hence, the Writ Petition. Having heard on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, we are of the view that since the main appeal itself is pending on the file of the first respondent, we refrain to go into the merits or objections raised by the respondents. These are all matters to be gone into in the main appeal. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, there shall be stay pending the appeal subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits half of the disputed tax within a period of six {6} weeks from today. It is needless to mention that any amount, which is already paid, shall be given credit to. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) ______________________ (VILAS V.AFZUL PURKAR, J) 24th November 2008 RRB