APHC010322442024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 16412/2024 Between: M/s.paidala.thirupathi Reddy And Bros ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKAT CHALLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following ORDER: Heard Ms.Devasri Varshini, learned counsel representing Sri Venkat Challa, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rasheed Basha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings for respondents 1 to 4, and Smt. Chandrika learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance for the 5th respondent. 2. The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents in withholding the Part II & III final payments concerning the works i.e. (i) Improvements to NH-7 to Gondiparla road from KM 0/0 to 8/0 in Kurnool 2 District vide agreement No.39/2022-23 sanction vide G.O.Rt.No.292, T (R&B) (R.III) Department, dated 23.09.2021, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. An agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent for improvements to NH-7 to Gondiparla road from KM 0/0 to 8/0 in Kurnool District. A supplementary agreement was also entered into vide Agreement No.39/2022-23. The petitioner, as per the averments in the affidavit, completed the works in terms of the agreement. The officials of the respondents recorded the same in M-book, and the amount payable to the petitioner comes to Rs.4,94,29,895/-. However, since the amount has not been paid, the above writ petition is filed. 4. A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent. Para 6 of the counter-affidavit is relevant and is extracted as under: “It is submitted that the said work “Improvements to NH-7 to Gondiparla road from KM 0/0 to 8/0 in Kurnool District” had completed and based on the recorded M-books recommended by the Deputy Executive Engineer, the (A) LS 2nd and Part bill Gross amount for Rs.3,13,20,835/- (net amount is Rs.2,91,36,178) was uploaded in NIDHI website and in CFMS the details of the bill is ID No.2024-9039272 under HOA 5054-04-337-12-05-530-531 VN and approved by Pay & Accounts Office, Kurnool and the status of the bill is “Bill Waiting for Fund Clearance. (B) LS 3rd and Final bill Gross amount for Rs.2,20,68,483/- (Net amount Rs.1,45,16,960) vide M.Book No.1978-A. But the bill token was not generated in NIDHI Portal. IT is showing error as insufficient budget under Head of account 5054-04-337- 12-05-530-531 VN. Hence the total Gross bill to be paid is Rs.5,33,89,318/- and Net bill to be paid is Rs.4,36,53,138/-.” 5. Thus, as seen from the averments in the counter-affidavit, there is no dispute about the completion of works and the petitioner’s entitlement. In fact, the bill was uploaded to the CFMS Portal. 6. At this juncture, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance would contend that since the amount is not released on or before 31.03.2025 3 to the petitioner, the respondents have to again upload the bill in the CFMS Portal. 7. Thus, the instances referred to above demonstrate the entitlement of the petitioner to the amount due to the completion of work as per the agreement. Since there is no dispute regarding the petitioner’s entitlement, a writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors vs. Chief General Manager & Ors. (In SLP (C) No.14350/2022) it was held at Para No.8 as under: “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. Non-payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the part of respondents and for claiming the same, a writ petition may lie.” 8. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to upload the bill in CFMS portal in respect of the aforementioned works within four (4) weeks from today. Thereafter, the 5th respondent shall pay/release the amount within three (3) months. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 08.04.2025 KA 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 16412/2024 Date: 08.04.2025 KA