IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition No. 714 of 2009 Between: M/s.Bhoorathnom Constructions Co.(P) Ltd., 7-3-720 Rashtrapathi Road,Secunderabad-500003 rep.by its Director,Mr.A.B.Madhav ... PETITIONER AND 1) Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Finance & Planning (Works & Projects) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad 2) The Superintending Engineer (R&B) Rural Circle, At Balkampet, Hyderabad 3) The Executive Engineer, (R&B),City Roads Division At Masab Tank,Hyderabad 4) The Pay & Accounts Officer, Ranga Reddy District Hyderabad 5) The Commercial Tax officer, Hissamgunj Circle 5th floor, Mayur Kushal Towers, Gunfoundry,Abids,Hyderabad ...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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus directing that the petitioner is entitled to get addition of 4% over the cost of work as VAT instead of 1.4.% or less as was done by the respondent contractees (2) 3rd and 4th respondent to follow the instructions of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.11 dated 29.7.2005 and G.O.Ms.No.141 dated 27.7.2006 and to release difference of tax amount in respect of all the bills which were already passed by them and (3) the 3rd and 4th respondent to follow the instructions of the Government and pass future bills by adding 4% on the estimated work value i.e. in respect of the works already entrusted to the petitioner as per which the petitioner is executing works and for which bills are yet to be passed. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.RAMESH BABU Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4: GP FOR R & B Counsel for Respondent No.5: GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX The Court made the following: Oral Order: (Per Shri Anil R. Dave, Chief Justice) 1. Rule. 2. Service of Rule is waived by the learned Government Pleaders appearing for the respondent authorities. 3. At the request of the learned advocates, the petition is taken up for final hearing today. 4. The petitioner is a contractor, who had entered into a contract with R & B Department. It is an admitted fact that 4% of Value Added Tax (VAT) had been deducted by R & B Department from the amount payable to the petitioner, but, in fact, has given credit to the petitioner to the tune of only 1.4%. So, it is an admitted fact that 2.6% of the amount of tax is to be paid by respondent No.3 to the petitioner herein. 5. The learned Government Pleader has fairly submitted that respondent No.3 shall do the needful for making payment of the amount payable to the petitioner, if it makes an application to that effect. 6. In the circumstances, the petitioner shall, after calculating the amount payable to it, submit an application to respondent No.3 and on receipt of such an application, respondent No.3 shall do the needful for making payment of 2.6% of the amount of which no credit has been given so far to the petitioner. 7. with the above directions, the petition stands disposed of as allowed. 8. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ January 30, 2009 RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Issue C.C. in two days (By Order) svs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}