M/S.Back Bone Projects Limited, ... vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh, ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2722 AP

       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO

                 WRIT PETITION No.12226 of 2012

ORDER:

The petitioner seeks writ of Mandamus declaring the action of

the respondents in proposing to recover the seigniorage charges on

sand with one time penalty from the bills of the petitioner in respect of

the works executed under them on the pretext that the permits for sand

issued by the Mines Department were not produced, as illegal,

arbitrary and unjust and consequential direction to respondents to drop

all further proceedings relating to recovery of the penalty on

seigniorage charges on the works executed by the petitioner and such

other order.

2. When the matter is called, it is represented by learned counsel

for petitioner so also the learned Government Pleader that the issue in

the present writ petition is squarely covered by the orders of this Court

in W.P.No.8539 of 2011, dated 02.01.2017.

3. Following the above said judgment and for the reasons recorded

therein, this writ petition is disposed of, thus:

In the event the petitioner filed proof to the effect that

seigniorage charges were deducted from his bills by the Departments

concerned, under whom he has executed the contract works, no

penalty shall be levied as per G.O.Ms.No.84, Industries & Commerce

(MI) Department, dated 10.04.2007 lest the respondents shall be

entitled to recover seigniorage charges along with one time penalty as

per the aforesaid G.O. No costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed.

_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 29.07.2021 SS