IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 27546 of 2008 Between: M/s Sri Venkateswara Constructions Advocates Colony Hanumakonda Warangal District rep.by its Managing Partner M.Ravinder Reddy S/o.M.Ramakrishan Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep.by its Principal Secretary Finance & Planning (Works and Projects) Department at Secretariat Hyderabad 2 The Engineer in Chief National Highways & Administration Erramanzil Colony Hyderabad 3 The Engineer In Chief, Roads and Buildings Erramanzil Colony Hyderabad 4 The Chief Engineer HUDCO Erramanzil Colony Hyderabad 5 The Superintending Engineer R&B Circle,Karimnagar 6 The Superintending Engineer R&B Circle,Warangal 7 The Superintending Engineer R&B NH Circle Hyderabad 8 The Executive Engineer R&B Divsion Peddapalli,Karimnagar District 9 The Executive Engineer R&B Divsion Warangal District 10 The Executive Engineer R&B Divsion Karimnagar 11 The Executive Engineer R&B NH Warangal 12 The Pay & Accounts Officer(LMD) Karimnagar 13 The Pay & Accounts Officer Chintagattu,Warangal District 14 The Regional Pay & Accounts Officer Koramangala,Bangalore 15 The Commercial Tax Officer Fort Road Warangal .....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 in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, order or Direction declaring the memo No.602/F8(1)/2006 dated 14-3-2007 issued by the first respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of AP VAT ACT and Rules made thereunder and to consequently hold that petitoner is entitled for addition of 4% on the entire value of work done and deduction of 4% towards VAT at the time of payment of each bill, in terms of provisions of GOMs.No.11 dated 29-7-2005, G.O.Rts.No.141 dated 27/7/2006 and under Section 22(3) of AP VAT Act by driecting the Respodnents to pay the difference of 2.6 % amount on the total value of works, to the petitioner; Award costs and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAGHUVEER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.27546 of 2008 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) 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, learned counsel on either side submitted that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the Judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.484 of 2008, dated 18.01.2008. However, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes 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 respondents 2 to 14 not to remit any further amount to the 15th respondent in respect of deductions already made pursuant to the Memo, dated 14.03.2007 of the first respondent, while processing the final bill, however, subject to 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 respondent Nos.2 to 14 in the bills. No costs. __________________ ( J) ________________ Dated: 18-12-2008 (K.C.BHANU, J) Note: Issue C.C. in three days (B/o) Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}