IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24958 of 2008 Between: HES Infra Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Partner Mr. I.V.R. Krishnam Raju (Previously known as Hindustan Engineers Syndicate Engineers & Contractors) Having its registered Office at Plot No. 39, B.N. Reddy Colony, Road No. 14, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning (Works & Projects) Department at Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Engineer-in-Chief, R & B Hyderabad. 3 The Superintending Engineer, GNSS Circle Kadapa. 4 The Executive engineer R & B Division, Kadapa. 5 The Commercial Tax Officer No.I, Kadapa. 6 The Commercial Tax Officer No.II, Kadapa. 7 The Pay and Accounts Officer, Kadapa. 8 The Regional Officer, Ministry of Transport and Shipping Errum Manzil, Hyderabad. 9 The Deputy Executive Engineer (R &B) Muddanur, Kadapa District. 10 The Deputy Executive Engineer (R & B) Jammalamadugu, Kadapa District. 11 The Deputy Executive Engineer Proddatur, Kadapa District. .....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 a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or writs, order or direction 1. Declaring the Memo No. 602/F8(1)/2006 dated 14-03-2007 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, invalid and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. value Added Ta Act, rules made there under, G.O.Ms.No. 11 dated 29-07-2005 and G.O.ms.No. 141 dated 27-07-2006, 2. Declaring the action of the respondents in adding only 1.4% to the estimated cost work and deducting 4% towards VAT at the time of payment of each bill in respect of works as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Value Added Tax Act, rules made there under, G.O.Ms.No. 11 dated 29-07- 2005 and G.O.Ms.No. 141 dated 27-07-2006 3. Directing the respondents to pay the difference amount of 2.6% on the total value of the works, to the petitioner and 4. Award Costs and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.SUMAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 and 6: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 and 8 and 11: GP FOR ROADS AND BUILDINGS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24958 of 2008 ORDER: (per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) Heard both sides. At their request, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission. At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel on either side submitted that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.484 of 2008, dated 18.1.2008. However, learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Tax submitted that though the petitioner states that it has paid 4% tax on the entire work done, it has to be ascertained while processing the final bill. Following the ratio laid down in the above referred judgment, the Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed with a direction to the respondents not to remit any further amount in respect of deductions already made pursuant to the memo, dated 14.3.2007 of the 1st respondent, while processing the final bill, however, subject to the payment of 4% which is stated to have been made by the petitioner. It is needless to mention that, as agreed by the counsel on either side, the balance of 2.6% has to be added by the respondents in the bills. GHULAM MOHAMMED, J B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Date: 18.11.2008 va