Telangana High Court
WP/33635/2010 of B.Srinivas Reddy Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its on 31 December 2010
MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.33635 of 2010 DT.31.12.2010 Between: B.Srinivas Reddy … Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh rep.by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents Counsel for the
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
Writ Petition No.33635 of 2010
DT.31.12.2010
Between:
B.Srinivas Reddy
And
… Petitioner
Government of Andhra Pradesh rep.by its Principal Secretary, PanchayatRaj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner:Sri Resu Mahender Reddy Counsel for respondents: AGP for Panchayat Raj The Court made the following ORDER:
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:
This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief:
“…to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly aWrit of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in notincluding the 1% towards Labour Cess on gross bill in respect ofall works allotted to the petitioner and payments made after07.06.2010 by revising the estimate as per U.O.NoteNo.4763/PFS.F8(A1)/98-4, Dt.28.02.2008 as illegal, arbitrary andviolation of Article-14 & 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India andconsequently directing the respondents to include 1% towardsLabour Cess in all the works entrusted to the petitioner and torelease the amounts which were already recovered in this regardto the petitioner.”
At the hearing, the learned counsel for the parties agreed that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by final orders, dated22.10.20009, in W.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch, and that following thesaid order, W.P.No.532 of 2010, was disposed of by this Court by order,dated 21.01.2010, wherein it was held as under:
“The subject matter of this writ petition is squarelycovered by a common order passed by this Court inW.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch dated 22.10.2009.
Following the same, this writ petition is also disposed ofdirecting that:- (a) the respondents shall include 1% cess in theestimates for the works which they propose to undertake, if thework continues for or beyond twelve months and involvesengagement of 10 workers or more; and (b) the respondents shall not deduct any amounttowards cess, unless the corresponding amount is included inthe estimates.”
In the light of the above, this writ petition is disposed of in terms ofthe orders, dated 22.10.2009 in W.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch, anddated 21.01.2010 in W.P.No.532 of 2010.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.42626 of2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J)
Date:31.12.2010VGB