L.Harerama Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

W.P.No. 20068 of 2010

Oral order:

The petitioner prays that a direction be issued to the respondents to include 1% towards Labour Cess in all the works entrusted to the petitioner and for all the payments made after 26-06-2007 as per Clause (i) of U.O.No.4763/PFS/F8/98-4, Finance (Works & Projects) Department, dated 28-02-2008.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by a common order passed by this court in W.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch, dated 22-10-2009.

¶6

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation, however, submits that since large number of cases are already pending in this Court and at most, only interim order may be passed and cases may not be disposed of in terms of W.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch.

¶7

Heard the learned counsel at length.

¶8

The question which came up for consideration in W.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch and the present writ petition is absolutely one and the same. Hence, no purpose would be served by passing interim order now and thereafter disposing of the cases in terms of decision rendered in W.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch.

¶9

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as in W.P.No.11269 of 2009 and batch with the following directions:

¶10

(a) the respondents shall include 1% cess in the estimates for the works which they propose to undertake, if the work continues for or beyond twelve months and involves engagement of 10 workers or more; and

¶11

(b) the respondents shall not deduct any amount towards cess, unless the corresponding amount is included in the estimates.

¶12

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP No.25423 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.

¶14

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.

¶15

Dt. 07-02-2012 lvl

L.Harerama Reddy v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Harerama Reddy v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Farmers Export Society ( Registered Under the Provisions Vs The Union of India

K. Jagannatha Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

P.K.K. Ameena Vs General Manager / Person in charge

M/s.Srinivasa Constructions Company Nagapur, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

M/s v.Srinath and Company Rep.by its Managing Partner Vs The Engineer-in Chief Rws,Erramanjil,Hyderabad

B. Malyadri Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh