Rajeev Yuvajana Sangham, Cuddapah, Vs The State A.P

RAJEEV YUVAJANA SANGHAM, CUDDAPAH,, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, S.SADAQ ALI, S/O. ATTAULLA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OFF- D.NO.9/496-1.AGADI STREET, KADAPA DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

THE STATE A P, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. (APSRTC) RTC HOUSE, PNBS, VIJAYAWADA, A.P520013.

¶17

THE DISTRICT PUBLIC TRANSPORT OFFICER, APSRTC, BHEEMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P.

¶18

THE REGIONAL/UNIT MANAGER, APSRTC PALAKOLLU, NARASAPURAM DEPOT, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P.

¶19

THE DISTRICT PUBLIC TRANSPORT OFFICER, APSRTC, TIRUPATHI. TIRUPATI DISTRICT

¶20

THE REGIONAL/UNIT MANAGER, APSRTC, CBS/TIRUPATHI, VENKATAGIRI.TIRUPATI DISTRICT

¶21

THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, ANDHRA

¶22

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_7033_2025

¶23

2

¶24

PRADESH AT D.NO.5-59, R.K. SPRING VALLEY APARTMENT, BANDAR RAOD, EEDUPUGALLU VILLAGE, KANKIPADU MANDAL, KRISHANA DISTRICT, A.P.

¶25

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶26

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in demanding Central GST and AP GST of 9percent each, totaling 18 percent on the monthly license fee collected from the petitioner for the work contract of maintenance of toilets at 4th and 6th Respondent Bus Stations, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the exemption granted by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance through its Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), Dt28.06.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.588 dated 12.12.2017, issued by Revenue (Commercial Taxes-ll) Department, Government of A.P and contrary to the orders passed by this Honble Court in Rajeev Yuvajana Sangham Vs. State of A.P (2022 SSC OnLine AP 2549 - (2022) 65 GSTL 298 and to pass

¶27

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased direct the Respondent No. 3 to 6 to not insist GST on monthly license fee for the work contract of maintenance of toilets at 4th & 6th Respondents depots, from the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

¶29

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶30

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to Vacate the Interim order dated 19.03.2025 in I.A.No. 1 of 2025 in W.P.No.7033 of 2025 and dismiss the writ petition as devoid of merits and to pass

¶31

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_7033_2025

¶32

3

¶33

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶34

1.RAMAKRISHNA AKURATHI

¶35

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶36

1.ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC)

¶37

2.GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

¶38

3.GP FOR TRANSPORT

¶39

The Court made the following:

¶40

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_7033_2025

¶41

4

¶42

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶43

AND

¶44

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

¶45

WP No.7033 OF 2025

¶46

ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D.Sekhar)

¶47

The petitioner is a registered society engaged in the contract works pertaining to sanitation and cleaning toilets in different bus stations under 2^nd respondent.

¶48

It is the case of the petitioner that, it was awarded contract for maintaining the toilet blocks for the period from 06.02.2025 to 05.02.2027. It is further case of the petitioner that, as the 7^th respondent started demanding GST @ 18% from the petitioner for the services rendered by it, the present writ petition is filed.

¶49

It is further case of the petitioner that, by virtue of notification No.12 of 2017 Central Tax (Rate), dt.28.06.2017 GST was exempted for the services under Heading 9994, S.No.76, which refers to “services by way of public conveniences such as provision of facilities of bathroom, washrooms, lavatories, urinals or toilets”. Similar exemption was also granted by the State of Andhra Pradesh through G.O.Ms.No.588, Revenue (Commercial

¶50

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_7033_2025

¶51

5

¶52

Taxes-2) Department dt.12.12.2017. It is further contended that in such circumstances, the 7^th respondent does not have power or jurisdiction to demand GST for the services rendered by the petitioner.

¶53

Counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on the judgment rendered by this Court in “ Rajeev Yuvajana Sangham Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others”¹ would contend that no GST can be collected from the petitioner for the services rendered by it. He would further submit that the said judgment was rendered in petitioner’s own case and in such circumstances, the action of the 7^th respondent in demanding GST for the services rendered by the petitioner is liable to be interdicted.

¶54

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Pleader for Commercial Taxes, Sri S.A.V.Sai Kumar, does not dispute the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition and requests to pass appropriate order in the matter.

¶55

It is apparent from the record that, the services rendered by the petitioner are exempted in terms of Notification No.12/2017, dt.28.06.2017. Further, the Government of Andhra

¶56

1 WP No.16162 of 2022

¶57

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_7033_2025

¶58

6

¶59

Pradesh also granted similar exemption through G.O.Ms.No.588, dt.12.12.2017. Apart from the same, as rightly pointed by the counsel for the petitioner that, earlier it had approached this Court by filing a writ petition and the same was allowed by order dt.24.08.2022 in WP No.16162 of 2022.

¶60

Though the present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 7^th respondent in demanding the GST on the services rendered by the petitioner, nothing is placed on record to show that any notice or order of assessment passed against it. In the absence of any notice or assessment order, it can be held that, the present writ petition is filed on apprehension. In the circumstances, the present writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to the 7^th respondent to act in accordance with the judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.No.16162 of 2022 and not to demand GST on the services rendered by the petitioner. Needless to mention, it is always open to the respondent authorities to proceed against the petitioner for any other activities, which does not form part of Notification No.12 of 2017, dt.28.06.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.588, dt.12.12.2017.

¶61

NJSJ & TCDS, J WP_7033_2025

¶62

7

¶63

8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There

¶64

shall be no order as to costs.

¶65

As a sequel, pending applications, if any shall stand closed.

¶66

___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA