The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed the writ petition challenging G.O.Ms.No.183 as unconstitutional, holding the matter covered by a prior judgment (W.P.No.21878 of 1999).
None. The writ petition was dismissed following a prior judgment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI
and
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 22278 of 1999
Between:
M/s. Hiralal Prabhuram & Company, 10-7-620, Gajulpet, Nizamabad, rep. by its Constituted Attorney, Mr. Hitendra Shantilal Upadhyay
..... PETITIONER
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue) Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad
2. M/s. AP Forest Development Corporation Ltd. A.c.Guards, Hyderabad rep. by its Managing Director
3. The Commercial Tax Officer,
Aghapura, Hyderabad,
Assessing Authority of 2nd respondent. .....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction declaring the G.O.Ms.No.183, Revenue (CT-II) Dept., dt: 6-3-1999 issued by the 1st Respondent as unreasonable, discriminatory, arbitrary and hence unconstitutional and set aside the same and consequently declare that the Petitioner is entitled to purchase beedi leaves as raw materials against form 'G' under section 5-B of the Act.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.P.Srinivas Reddy
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: Spl. Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Mr.P.Sree Ramulu Naidu
The Court made the following:
ORDER: (PER BN, J)
It is submitted by learned Counsel for the parties that the matter is covered by a judgment of this Court in W.P.No.21878 of 1999, dated 05-11-2004. Following the same, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
(BILAL NAZKI, J)
9th November, 2004
(S.ANANDA REDDY, J)
LUR
Copy to:
1. The Principal Secretary,
State of Andhra Pradesh, (Revenue) Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad
2. The Managing Director,
M/s. AP Forest Development Corporation Ltd.
A.C.Guards, Hyderabad
3. The Commercial Tax Officer,
Aghapura, Hyderabad, Assessing Authority of
The 2nd respondent.
4. Two CD copies.
5. Two CCs to Spl. Standing Counsel for Commercial taxes,
High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (O.U.T.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's writ petition challenging G.O.Ms.No.183 is maintainable in light of a prior judgment.
Whether the petitioner should be declared entitled to purchase beedi leaves against Form 'G'.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.No.21878 of 1999, dated 05-11-2004Referred¶23
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Hiralal Prabhuram & Company
The State of Andhra Pradesh
M/s. AP Forest Development Corporation Ltd.
The Commercial Tax Officer
Bilal Nazki
S.Ananda Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
