\ APHC010339832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 787 OF 2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 27.06.2025 passed in W.P.No. 15622 of 2025. Between: Rapaka Govinda Rao, S/o.Rapaka Trinath Rao, Aged about 57 Years, Dasamantapur, Pangiput, Koraput, Odisha-764043. ...Appellant/Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Engineering Department, Panchayat Raj Circle, Visakhapatnam Z.P. Compound, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam - 530002. 3. The Engineer-In-Chief, Panchayat Raj Engineering Department, PMGSY Scheme, Vijayawada. Government, ...Respondents/Respondents lA NO: 2 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 pending disposal of the above Writ Appeal, to suspend the operation of the order dated 27.06.2025 passed in W.P. No. 15622 of 2025 and the consequential proceedings Rc. No. AEE6/PMGSY/PM-JANMAN/2024-25, dated 17.06.2025 issued by the 2nd Respondent, and further direct the Respondents to permit the Appellant to furnish Performance Security and Additional Performance Security strictly in accordance with Clause 30 and Clause 26.3 of the Instructions to Bidders and Clause 46 of the General Conditions of Contract, i.e., on the basis of the Contract Price and not the Estimated Contract Value. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V.N.V.SURYA DATTU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: APHC010339832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI Bench Sr.No:-123 [3483] WRIT APPEAL NO: 787 of 2025 Rapaka Govinda Rao ...Appellant Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Appellant Advocate for Respondents : Mr. V.N.V.Surya Dattu : GP for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 14th July 2025 PC: The petitioner/appellant herein was found to be a successful bidder in regard to four contracts in a tendering process, which was initiated by the Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department through the Engineer-in- Chief. Letter of Acceptance was issued by the respondents in regard to all four contracts. The appellant was aggrieved of 4 communications, all dated 2. 09.06.2025, issued by the Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle, Visakhapatnam - 530002, whereby the appellant was directed to deposit an additional performance security deposit as also to furnish Performance Security @ 2.5% on the Estimated Contract Value (ECV). Against the communications supra, a representation was 3. preferred by the appellant before the official respondents, which too came to 2 HCJ & RCJ W.A.No.787of2025 be rejected by virtue of communication, dated 17.06.2025. Being aggrieved of the order, dated 17.06.2025, the appellant preferred a writ petition before the learned single Judge, who dismissed the same by virtue of order, dated 27.06.2025. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the additional performance security deposit, which the orders impugned in the writ petition demanded from the appellant, could have been asked to deposit only by the Engineer-in-Chief and not by the Superintending Engineer, who did not have the jurisdiction to ask for the same. Reference, in this regard, was made to Clause 26.3 of the instructions to bidders in that regard. 4. Insofar as the demand for Performance Security @ 2.5% of the 5. Estimated Contract Value is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the same could have been claimed only on the basis of the contract value in terms of Clause 46.1 of the General Conditions of Contract. It is stated that the learned single Judge had not appreciated the controversy in its right perspective and proceeded to dismiss the petition simply by upholding that ‘the direction given by the respondent authorities vide impugned proceedings, dated 17.06.2025, was just and reasonable’. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the judgment and order impugned, dated 27.06.2025, is in fact a non-speaking order, which neither records the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant herein nor justifies as to how the directions given 7. nL/J Oi r\v^j W.A.No.787 of 2025 by the respondent in proceedings, dated 17.06.2025, was ‘just and n reasonable’. We are of the opinion that the matter requires to be remanded with a view to get a reasoned opinion of the learned single Judge. 8. We, accordingly, allow the Writ Appeal by setting aside the judgment and order impugned, dated 27.06.2025, and direct the Registry to place the matter before the learned single Judge having Roster for consideration afresh. 9. In the meantime, the failure on the part of the appellant to comply with the directions to deposit the additional performance security as also the Performance Security calculated @ 2.5% on Estimated Contract Value shall not be a ground for cancellation of the contract, till the matter is considered by the learned single Judge. No costs. 10. Consequently, connected miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- S.V.S.R. MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR w Ur SECTION OFFICER //TRUECOPY// To. 1. The Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. 2 The Principal Secretary to Government, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Engineering Department, Z.P. Compound, Maharanipeta, Panchayat Raj Circle, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam - 530002. Engineer-ln-Chief, Panchayat Raj engineering Department, 4. The PMGSY Scheme, Vijayawada. 5. One CC to Sri. V.N.V.Surya Dattu Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj Rural Dev, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. The Section Officer, Writs (Non-service) Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 8. The Section Officer, Posting Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 9. Two CD Copies vna HIGH COURT I DATED; 14/07/2025 JUDGMENT WA NO. 787 OF 2025 JUL 2025 J| rrentSectiooX^y v£f, ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS