IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 269 OF 2025 Between: Budamgunta Nageswara Rao, S/o. Prasad Chairman of HWC/Contractor r S.N.Padu Mandal, Prakasam District. Aged about 40 years. Occ " Chilakapadu Village, R/o.D.No.5-15-1 ...Petitioner AND 3. The Executive Engineer, PRi Division, Ongole, Prakasam District. '*■ Executive Engineer, PRi Division Engineer, Mandai Praja Parishad Nellore-ll, SPSR Nellore S.N.Padu, Prakasam ...Respondents Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution the circumstances stated i be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order particulariy one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus deciaring action of the Respondents in not releasing the biil amount Covered by GGMP Grant worth of Rs. 3,27,913/- for Construction of India praying that in in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may or direction more of side drains to East side of R and B main road in Chilakapdu Village of S.N.Padu Mandal Prakasam % District Vide work ID No. PR-5138-9303 for Agreemerrt No. /2023-24 dated 18.10.2023 and causing heavy loss with interest even though total works as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article were completed within time 14 16 and 21 of Constitution Respondents to release and at the rate of 12 percent petitioner forthwith of India and consequently direct the pay the surrr of Rs. 3,27,913/- with the interest per annum from the due date till realization to the lA NO: 1 OF Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to release and pay the sum of Rs. 3.27,913/- With the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the due date till realization to the petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the above petition writ Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK Counsel for the Respondent No. planning'’ No.2 The Court made the following: Order MEERAVALI 1: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL to 5: GP FOR FINANCE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 269 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s: "....pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring action of the Respondents in not releasing the bill amount Covered by GGMP Grant worth of Rs.3,27,913/- for “Construction of side drains to East side of R&B main road in Chilakapadu Village of S.N. Padu Mandal, Prakasam District” yide work ID No.PR- 5138-9303 for Agreement No. causing heavy loss with interest even though total works were completed within time as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to release and pay the sum of Rs.3,27,913/- with the interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the due date till realization to the petitioner forthwith and to pass such other order or orders " /2023-24 dated 18.10.2023 and Pithily, the Writ Petition is filed to direct the respondents for 2. payment of amount due to the petitioner for the work executed. ^.9 2 3. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India and others v. Puna Hinda\ observed in the following manner: "Though, the jurisdiction of the High Court is wide but in respect of pure contractual matters in the field of private law, having no statutory flavour, are better adjudicated upon by the forum agreed to by the parties. The dispute as to whether the amount is payable or not and/or how much amount is payable are disputed questions of facts. There is no admission on the part of the appellants to infer that the amount stands crystallized. Therefore, in the absence of any acceptance of Joint Survey Report by the competent authority, no right would accrue to the writ petitioner only because measurements cannot be undertaken after passage of time. May be, the resurvey cannot take place but the measurement books of the work executed from time to time would form a reasonable basis for assessing the amount due and payable to the writ petitioner, but such process could be undertaken only by the agreed forum i.e., arbitration and not by the Writ Court as it does not have the expertise in respect of measurements or construction of roads." 4. Set apart even if the liability is admitted by the Government, this Court cannot issue direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to compel it to make the payment of such dues. The only remedy open to the person aggrieved is either to approach the civil court for necessary relief or to get the matter referred to the Arbitrator, if there is such a clause under the contract. Writ is not a remedy in such cases. 5. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the relief prayed by the petitioner cannot be granted by this Court. They (2021) 10 see 690 iprr 3 have to approach either the civil court or before the authority as per the agreement. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any shall stand closed. SD/- K. TATA RAO GISTRAR DEPUTY //TRUE COPY// / c;i 1 SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to SRI SHAIK MEERAVALI Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCS to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT], 3. Two CCs to GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies . HIGH COURT DATED: 29/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.269 of 2025 i- DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS