Allowed

M/s.Jaya Hume Pipes Pvt. Ltd., v. The A.P. State Irrigation Development Corporation Ltd.

Telangana HC20 Sept 2013WP/23832/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In six writ petitions challenging seigniorage charges levied by the Andhra Pradesh State Irrigation Development Corporation for earth refilling, the Court held the charges illegal, relying on a prior precedent equating trench digging with civil works, and dismissed the petitions.

What did the court decide?

Declaratory relief holding seigniorage charges illegal; pending W.P.M.Ps. closed.

M/s.Jaya Hume Pipes Pvt. Ltd., Vs The A.P… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION Nos.18125, 22151, 22162, 23825, 23832 and 37846 of 2012

¶3

Dated: 20.09.2013

¶4

W.P. No. 18125 of 2012

¶5

Between:

¶6

M/s. Coramandel Infrastructures (P) Limited. … Petitioner.

¶7

And

¶8

The A.P.State Irrigation Development Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Vice Chairman & Managing Director, Road No.13, Banjarahills, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents.

¶9

The Court made the following:

¶10

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶11

WRIT PETITION Nos.18125, 22151, 22162, 23825, 23832 and 37846 of 2012

¶12

COMMON ORDER :

¶13

The petitioner concerns are aggrieved by the action of the Andhra Pradesh State Irrigation Development Corporation Limited in levying seigniorage charges upon them in respect of the refilling of earth done by them while executing works relating to Munugodu, Hussain Nagaram, Didugu Lift Irrigation Schemes in Amaravathi Mandal, Grandhasiri, Ginjupalli-2 Lift Irrigation Schemes in Atchempeta Mandal, Chekkavaripalem, Konapalem Lift Irrigation Schemes on R.M.Drain in Nizampatnam Mandal, Guntur District and Malyala-I & II Lift Irrigation Scheme on foreshore of Srisailam Reservoir in Nandikotkur Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶14

2. This Court, by orders dated 19.06.2012, 23.07.2012, 23.07.2012, 03.08.2012, 03.08.2012 and 14.12.2012 suspended the impugned letters dated 25.05.2012, 26.05.2012, 25.05.2012, 24.05.2012, 26.05.2012 and 24.06.2011 respectively, issued by the Executive Engineer of the respondent - Corporation calling upon the petitioner concerns to pay the subject seigniorage charges.

¶15

3. While so, it is now brought to the notice of this Court that this very issue fell for consideration before this

¶16

Court in Larsen & Toubro Limited, rep. by its Manager and others Vs. Executive Engineer, Public Health . Engineering Department, Anantapur and others^[1] Therein, this Court held that digging of trenches in the course of civil works cannot be equated to mining activity attracting levy of seigniorage charges. The approach of the authorities to the contrary was held untenable.

¶17

4. For reasons alike as were mentioned in the aforestated order, these writ petitions are allowed declaring the action of the respondent - Corporation in seeking to collect seigniorage charges for refilling of earth undertaken by the petitioner concerns in the course of the subject civil works to be illegal. Pending W.P.M.Ps. in these writ petitions shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

¶18

___________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J

¶19

20^th September, 2013 vhb/bsb

¶20

[1] 2013 (3) ALT 602

M/s.Jaya Hume Pipes Pvt. Ltd., v. The A.P. State Irrigation Development Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Jaya Hume Pipes Pvt. Ltd., v. The A.P. State Irrigation Development Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avuladapuram Bhojanna Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary

Dasari Murthy Vs Mr.L.Venkata Ramana Reddy

M/s. Poorna Shankari Industries, Vs Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd.

M/s.Jaya Flume Pipes Pvt. Ltd. Vs The A.P. State Irrigation Development Corporation Ltd.

Jojavarapu Mounika Vs The Deputy Director Fisheries cum Convenor

N.Rammohan Rao, Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Rep by its