Telangana High Court
WP/24632/2004 of M/s G.R.Constructions Engineers AND Contractors, Vs The chief Engineer (R ANDB) on 29 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 24632 of 2004 Between: M/s G.R.Constructions Engineers & Contractors, Opp.Coromandel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 24632 of 2004
Between:
M/s G.R.Constructions Engineers & Contractors, Opp.Coromandel Gate,Visakhapatnam –11, Rep.by its Proprietor K.Gangadhara Rao.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 The chief Engineer (R &B) Roads, Erramanzil, Hyderabad.
2 The Superintending Engineer R &B Circle, Seetammadhara Visakhapatnam.
3 ThePay & Accounts Officer YRC Wing,Maharanipet, Visakhapatnam-1 Visakhapatnam-1
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleasedto Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in thenature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents inrecovering the seigniorage charges on ordinary earth from the work bills of thepetitioner in respect of (1) Agreement No.10/2001-2002 (2) AgreementNo.43/2002-2003 and (3) Agreement No.51/2002-2003 entered into with the 2ndrespondent, as illegal, arbitrary and without authority of law and consequentlydirect the respondents to repay the amount recovered towards seignioragecharges on ordinary earth from the bills of the petitioner under the above saidagreements forthwith, Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.SIVA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS
The Court at the admission stage, made the following:
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner has been awarded the contract work of laying and special repairsof road in Visakhapatnam District. He entered into the agreement Nos.1)10/2001-2002,
2) 43/2002-2003 and 3) 51/2002-2003 with the 2[nd] respondent. The works wereestimated at the rate of Rs.1,29,49,381/-. While making payment of the bill tothe petitioner, the respondents deducted seigniorage charges on the ordinaryearth.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that there is no condition in the agreementfor deduction of seigniorage charges on ordinary earth. Therefore, the petitionerclaims that the action of the respondents in deducting the said amount is illegal.He challenged the same in this writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court aJudgment of the Division Bench of this Court, in W.P.No.2054 of 2004, whereina Division Bench passed the following Order:
“Following the said view, we allow the writ petition directing the respondentsnot to collect any seigniorage charges from the petitioner for digging ordinaryearth in respect of execution of contract work covered under the agreement,No costs. However, we make it clear that if the tax is included in theestimate on the earthwork component, it can be deducted as perG.O.Ms.No.23, dated 05-03-1999.”
4. In view of the above said order of the Division Bench, the writ petition isdisposed of directing the respondents not to collect the seigniorage charges onthe ordinary earthwork, in the absence of a condition in the agreements enteredinto between the parties and in the absence of inclusion of seigniorage chargeswhile assessing the cost of the work entrusted to the petitioner.
5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
__________________
December 29, 2004
Kvr
To
1 The chief Engineer (R &B) Roads, Erramanzil, Hyderabad.2 The Superintending Engineer R &B Circle, Seetammadhara Visakhapatnam. 2 The Superintending Engineer R &B Circle, Seetammadhara Visakhapatnam.
3 The Pay & Accounts Officer YRC Wing, Maharanipet,Visakhapatnam-1.Maharanipet,Visakhapatnam-1.
4. 2 CCs to G.P. for Roads and Buildings, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT)Hyderabad (OUT)
5. 2 C.D copies.