Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15196 (AP)

Munnangi Venkata Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/11089/2025 · 2025-09-14

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010191892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11089/2025 Between: 1. MUNNANGI VENKATA RAO, S/O. VENKATESWARLU, AGED 65 YEARS, CHAIRMAN H.W.C, R/O. 17-34, NEAR WATER TANK, UPPUGUNDUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT-523186. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, NO. 12-47, P.V.S. EMPIRE, NEAR PRATUR CROSS ROAD, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HOUSING CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PLOT NO. 11 AND 12 BEHIND BSNL TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA. 5. THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ONGOLE, PRAKSAM DISTRICT. 2 6. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 7. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NAGULUPPALAPADU MANDAL. NAGULUPPALAPADU. 8. THE UPPUGUNDUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, UPPUGUNDUR, NAGULUPPALAPADU MANDAL. ...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 topleased 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 payments of Rs. 3,12,612/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Twelve Thousand and Six Hundred and Twelve Only) for the works executed by the petitioner as bad, illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and against the Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the amounts of Rs. 3,12,612/-(Rupees Three Lakhs Twelve Thousand and Six Hundred and Twelve Only), payable to the petitioner for the works executed by the petitioner IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 25/03/2025 and to release the withheld amount of Rs. 3,12,612/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Twelve Thousand and Six Hundred and Twelve Only) forthwith Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BANDLA PAVAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 3 The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:11089 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. The petitioner had been awarded the contract of work(s) under the subject scheme in Prakasam District. After execution of the said contract, a final bill was prepared for a sum of Rs.3,12,612/- as per the sanctioned orders. As the payment of the said amount has not been made by the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this Writ Petition. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that even though the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of the aforesaid sum of money, no payment is being made. The petitioner contends that such non- payment of money is clearly arbitrary and high-handed requiring the interference of this Court. 3. This Court, in various orders, including the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch had taken the view that such non-payment of dues is arbitrary and that such dues need to be cleared by the respondents at the earliest. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader placed on record the written instructions submitted by the Panchayat Secretary, Uppugundur Gram Panchayat, Naguluppalapadu Mandal, wherein, it is stated that since the funds were not released under the MGNREGS Scheme, the bills were not paid to the petitioner. Soon after release of the funds under the MGNREGS Scheme, the bills will be paid to the petitioner. 5 5. In view of the facts and circumstances submitted in the affidavit, and the directions of this Court in various cases and after hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the amount of Rs.3,12,612/- to the petitioner. 6. As far as interest component is concerned, if there is any subsisting clause in the agreement/work order envisaging payment or non-payment of interest upon any amount which is due and payable, the same is binding upon both the parties. In the absence of any clause with regard to interest component in the agreement, the respondents are directed to release the amount along with the interest @ 6% per annum on delayed payment, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021 and batch dated 12.10.2023 if not paid, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It would also be open to the petitioner to agitate his claim for higher rate of interest, if any payable by the respondents, in an appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _____________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA,J 15.09.2025 SCH 6 161 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:11089 OF 2025 15.09.2025 SCH