Judgment:
A. Lakshmana Rao, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the first respondent.
2. This writ petition is filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus declaring the letters No. 88/DV & EO/VZA/91, dated June 4, 1991, written by the first respondent to respondents 2, 3 and 4 as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, and further declaring the notice dated June 12, 1991, issued by the first respondent to the petitioner as illegal and without jurisdiction. The impugned letter dated June 4, 1991, written by the first respondent to respondents 2, 3 and 4 is in the nature of a request to cancel the sub-dealership or any authorisation granted in favour of the petitioner herein relating to the sale of Bajaj two wheelers and three wheelers.
3. Having regard to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, we are not in a position to understand under what provision of that Act such a request was made by the first respondent herein to respondents 2, 3 and 4. If the first respondent had taken any steps for recovery of any tax due from the petitioner or initiated any action for the alleged evasion of payment of tax, under the provisions of the Act, he could have been held to be acting within the limits of his authority under law. But, no provision is brought to our notice by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent which authorises him to make a request referred to above to other dealers to cancel the authorisation or sub-dealership granted in favour of the petitioner herein. Therefore, we quash the three impugned letters dated June 4, 1991, written by the first respondent to respondents 2, 3 and 4, respectively. This, however, does not preclude the first respondent from taking appropriate action in the matter including initiation of proceedings for the alleged evasion of tax by the petitioner.
4. It is, however, submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the first respondent has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice dated June 12, 1991, to the petitioner in order to initiate any consequential proceedings under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 or the Rules made thereunder, as the turnover in the instant case admittedly exceeds Rs. 10,00,000. If the petitioner submits explanation to the show cause notice issued to him and raises any such objection as to the jurisdiction of the first respondent, the same shall be considered by the first respondent and appropriate orders be passed.
5. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 250.
6. Writ petition partly allowed.