APHC010008022024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 597/2024 Between: 1. SHAIK NIZAMUDDIN, S/O. S. MASTHAN, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. 10-2, KOTHA KOTA, STREET. FILER, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 2. K. ARUNA,, W/O. K. VENKATARAMANA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC . BUSINESS, R/O. 4-266/1, SUDASUDHIR STREET. FILER, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 3. K. VENKATRAMANA,, S/O. K. YARRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC . CONTRACTOR, D.NO. 4- 266/1, SUDASUDHIR STREET. FILER, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 4. DUDL HARITHA,, W/O. DUDI VENKATRAMANA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS D.NO.4-41-3, INDIRA NAGAR, FILER, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. DUDL VENKATARAMANA,, S/O. DUDL KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O. 4- 41-3, INDIRA NAGAR, PILERU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 6. ATTAR SONIYA,, C/O. SHAIK MUNEER BASHA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. 9-662, RANGA NAYAKULA STREET, PILERU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 2 7. S. MUNEER BASHA,, S/O. S. SALEEM BASHA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. 9-662, RANGA NAYAKULA STREET, PILERU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 8. V M APSANA KOUSAR,, C/O. S. ABID, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. 5-150, PATHA MASEEDU VEEDHI, PILERU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 9. S. ABID,, S/O. S. MODIN BASHA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O. 5-150, PATHA MASEEDU VEEDHI, PILERU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 10. MAHASAMUDRAM PRAJWAL KUMAR,, S/O. M. HARI PRASAD REDDY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O. 0000, CHINTHA PENTA, AMMAGARIPALLE, PILERU, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR/ EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AP STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT AT RAYACHOTI. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. THE DIVISION HEAD, HOUSING, AP STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, RAYACHOTI DIVISION, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT. 3 6. THE DISTRICT HEAD HOUSING FAC, AP STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, RAYACHOTI DIVISION, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT 7. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 85 PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payment of pt and final bill amount of Rs.4,28,650/-, Rs. 4,28,650/-, Rs.4,28,650/- Rs.4,28,650/- Rs. 4,28,650/- and Rs. 4,28,650/- respectively Totally an amount of Rs. 25,71,900/- even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., 'Land Leveling in APIIC Layout -II Mudupulavemula (ID.No.02174LA002602) Mudupulavemula Grama Panchayat of Jaganna Housing Layout Colony of Filer Mandal, Annamayya District, is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of amount of Rs.4,28,650/-, Rs. 4,28,650/-, Rs.4,28,650/- Rs.4,28,650/- Rs. 4,28,650/- and Rs. 4,28,650/- respectively Totally an amount of Rs. 25,71,900/- with interest @24percent per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work forthwith and pass 4 IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Please to direct the respondents to consider for payment of amount of Rs.4,28,650/-, Rs. 4,28,650/-, Rs.4,28,650/- Rs.4,28,650/- Rs. 4,28,650/- Rs.4,28,650/-, Rs. 4,28,650/-, Rs.4,28,650/- Rs.4,28,650/- and Rs. 4,28,650/- Totally an amount of Rs. 42,86,500/- respectively even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., “Land Leveling in APIIC Layout - II Mudupulavemula (ID.No.02174LA002602) Mudupulavemula Grama Panchayat of Jaganna Housing Layout Colony of Piler Mandal, Annamayya District, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY R 2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 597 of 2024 The Court made the following Order: Instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief: “.... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payment of pt and final bill amount of Rs.4,28,650/-, Rs. 4,28,650/-, Rs.4,28,650/- Rs.4,28,650/- Rs. 4,28,650/- and Rs. 4,28,650/- respectively Totally an amount of Rs. 25,71,900/- even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., 'Land Leveling in APIIC Layout -II Mudupulavemula (ID.No.02174LA002602) Mudupulavemula Grama Panchayat of Jaganna Housing Layout Colony of Filer Mandal, Annamayya District, is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of amount of Rs.4,28,650/-, Rs. 4,28,650/-, Rs.4,28,650/- Rs.4,28,650/- Rs. 4,28,650/- and Rs. 4,28,650/- respectively Totally an amount of Rs. 25,71,900/- with interest @24percent per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work forthwith and pass such other order …”. 2. Sum and substance of the writ petition is that the petitioners challenged the inaction of the respondents in not releasing the amounts, even after completion of the entire works entrusted to them. 6 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the averments made in the writ affidavit, submits that in view of the non-release of the admitted amounts, the petitioners are facing multifarious problems, physically and fiscally. Hence, he submits that the release of the amounts is just and essential. 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader, places a copy of the written instructions dated 28.04.2026 issued by the District Head Housing, Annamayya District, Madanapalli and submits that four months’ time may be granted for paying the admitted amount of Rs.34,29,200/- to the petitioners. 6. Since it is not in dispute that the petitioners completed the works and has yet to receive payment, this Court finds the respondents’ failure to pay is unjustified. However, taking into consideration of the ground realities to settle the admitted amounts, the respondents are granted rational time to settle the dues. 7. Recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held in Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractor Vs Chief General 7 Manager and Others1, in vivid terms categorically held in the following manner. “8. Be that as it may, the High Court has not dealt with the merits of the writ petition. Moreover, it is not an inviolable rule that no money claim can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction…..” 8. It is apt to note that a mere financial incapacity/poor financial conditions, as stated by the respondents, for non- releasing of amounts after getting the works from the petitioners, cannot be a ground. 9. In view of the above stated legal position, the respondents, being the instrumentality of the ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, is bound to release the amount for the undisputed works done by the petitioners, without any further delay. A mere financial incapacity or paucity of funds cannot be a valid defence for non-fulfillment of such statutory obligations, more particularly, when the works executed by the petitioners are admitted by the respondent Corporation. 10. So far as the interest portion is concerned, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Managing Director & Ors. Vs. Sree Balaji Constructions & Ors. (Writ Appeal No.60 1 (2025) SCC Online SC 1400 8 of 2025) held that the award of interest on delayed payments was unsustainable in the absence of specific terms and conditions of the relevant agreement between the parties, but in the instant case, the learned counsel for the petitioners has not touched on the said point. However, the Hon’ble Division Bench in similar circumstances made it clear that the parties are at liberty to pursue their claims before an appropriate forum in accordance with the Law in respect of interest portion is concerned. 11. In the light of the above legal position, coupled with the fact that the liability for the undisputed works was admitted by the respondents, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the amount payable to the petitioners, within a period of four (04) months, from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is needless to say that the petitioners are at liberty to approach the appropriate Civil Court with regard to interest, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 04.05.2026 PSA