- (1.) The petitioners are the proprietorship concern registered under the provisions of U.P. Value Added Tax Act and claim to be engaged in the business of trading in river sand and grits and claim to bring these goods from outside the State of Uttar Pradesh. The reliefs which have been sought in these proceedings are as follows :- "i. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to recover/charge transit fee in any manner on the import/transportation of River Sand by the petitioner; ii. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to refund the amount collected from the petitioner in the name of transit fee on the import/transportation of River Sand."
(2.) The petitioners have relied on the interim orders which were passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 6 January 2010 in Writ Tax No.5 of 2010 (Agra Stone Traders Association Sewla and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) and the interim order passed by the Supreme Court dated 17 December 2009 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s). 11923/2009 (Kailash ) Chandra and others Vs. State of U.P. and others). Subsequently, the Supreme Court has, by an order dated 29 October 2013 passed in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11367/2007 (Kanhaiya Singh and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) modified the earlier interim orders which were passed in batch of cases in the following terms :- "We are, therefore, inclined to modify the orders suitably to the following effect: 1) The State shall be free to recover transit fee for forest produce removed from within the State of U.P. at the rate stipulated in the 3rd amendment to the Rules mentioned in the earlier part of this order. 2) Any such recovery shall remain subject to the ultimate outcome of present petitions pending in this Court. 3) In the event of writ petitioners/private parties succeeding in their cases, the amount deposited/recovered from them shall be refunded to them with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date the deposit was made till actual refund. 4) The State shall maintain accurate amount of recovery made and the nature and the quantum/quantity of the produce removed by the private parties concerned. 5) Even in the 2nd batch of cases arising out of Writ Petition No.975 of 2004 whereby the High Court has struck down the 4th and 5th amendment to the Rules, the State shall be free to make recoveries in terms of the 3rd amendment in regard to the forest produce removed from within the State of U.P. The operation of the orders passed by the High Court shall to that extent remain stayed."
(3.) In view of the subsequent order of the Supreme Court, a Division Bench of this Court by an order dated 28 November 2013 passed in Writ Tax No.967 of 2013 (M/s Rama Traders Vs. State of U.P. and 7 others) disposed of the writ petition in terms of the directions which were issued by the Supreme Court with an observation that the realisation of the transit fee in the manner as directed by the Supreme Court shall be subject to the final decision by the Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition against the judgments of this Court.;