A \ ^PHC010440512025 ■■'V l|iTHE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADES AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT APPEAL Nos. 986 AND 997 OF 2Q2fi WRIT APPEAL NO: 986 OF 2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the orders dated 16.07.2025 in W.P.No.14051 of 2025 on the file of High Court. Between: M/s. Sri Satya Sai Constructions, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Sri.Chekuri Krishnam Ra]u, S/o.Gopala Raju, Aged about 55 Sri Satya Sai Nilayam, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam years, R/o D.No.50-97-12 - 530013. ...PETITIONER/APPELLANT AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. Tribal 2. The Chief Engineer(Tribal Welfare Department) Fortune Road, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District. 3. The First Floor, Murair Revenue Colony Park, Sidhartha Nagar, Labbipet Superintendent Engineer, Visakhapatnam Town and District. T.W., Ushodaya Junction, 4. The Executive Engineer, T.W., Paderu, A.S.R. District. 5. The Director, Tribal Welfare Department, Sidhartha Nagar, Labbipet Vijayawada, N.T.R. District. 6. C. Y. Prakash Rao, S/o name not known to Petitioner, Aged about 50 years. Contractor, R/o D.No.8-22-25, Flat No.FF2, Aashyana Seetharama Raju Apartment, Kakinada - 533 004. 7. M/s. O. B. Munu Swamy Reddy & Co, Rep by its Authorized Person, Aged about 60 years. Contractor, Muddanur, Kadapa Town and District - 516001. R/o D.No.1-13, Yamavaram, ...RESPONDENTS lA 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 to stay of the proceedings with the balance work allotted to Respondent Nos. 6 & 7 by proceedings in Lr. RC. No. 01/2021-22/EI&CSS/Museum at Lambasingi/DB dated 23-04-2025 22/EI&CSS/Museum at Lambasingi/ DB dated 20-04-2025 and 24-04-2025, by suspending the operation of the proceedings, dated 20-04-2025 (EOAT) in Lr.R.C. No. DEEI/AEEII/Support to TRI & EI/PDR/TFFM Museum, disposal of the above Writ Appeal. lA NO: 2 OF 202Fi and Lr. RC. No. 01/2021- pending 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 to permit the petitioner to bring on record additional material papers namely “Notice under Section 13(2) of the SARPEASI ACT, 2002 on 26.12.2023 and 13.03.2024, Letters, dated 18.05.2025, 20.05.2024, 25.09.2025, 08.10.2024 21.11.2024, 19.02.2025, Orders in S.A.No.566 of 2024, G.O.Rt.No, 123 Department of Tribal Welfare, dated 11.08.2025 and Letter, dated 20.08.2025” on the file of this Hon'ble Court in the above Writ Appeal. JL. lA NO: 3 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 to SUSPEND the operation of the proceedings in Rc.No.01/2021-22/CSS Scheme Support to TRI/Lambasingi/Paderu/ DB/ dated 20.11.2024 wherein the Agreement bearing Agreement No 08/2021-22/DB/Dated 31.07.2021 terminated with the Petitioners, pending disposal of the above Writ Appeal. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.S.MURTHY, Senior Counsel for SRI B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l to 5:THE ADVOCATE GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7: SRI RAVULA NAGARJUNA APHC010440492025 was HSe WRIT APPEAL NO: 997 OF 2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 16.07.2025 in W.P.No.802 of 2025 on the file of High Court. Between: 1. M/s.Sri Satya Sai Constructions, Rep. by its Managing Partner, years. Sri Satya Sai Nilayam, Seethammadhara, Sri.Chekuri Krishnam Raju, S/o.Gopala Raju, Aged about 55 R/o D.No.50-97-12, Visakhapatnam - 530013. 2. Chekuri Krishnamraju, S/o Gopala Raju, aged 54 years, R/o D.No. 50- 9712, SFS School Back Side 530013 Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam - ...PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS AND .J*' idSJL^ 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Chief Engineer (Tribal Welfare Department), First Floor, Murali Fortune Road, Revenue Colony Park, Sidhartha Nagar, Labbipet, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District. 4. The Superintendent Engineer, T.W., Ushodaya Junction, Visakhapatnam Town and District. 5. 5. The Executive Engineer, T.W., Paderu, A.S.R. District. ...RESPONDENTS lA 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 to SUSPEND the operation of the proceedings in 22/CSSScheme Support to TRI/Lambasingi/Paderu/ DB/ dated 20.11.2024 wherein the Agreement bearing Agreement No 08/2021-22/DB/Dated 31.07.2021 with the Petitioners, pending disposal of the above Writ Appeal. Rc.No.01/2021 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.S.MURTHY, Senior Counsel for SRI B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following: COMMON JUDGMENT , APHC010440512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI Bench Sr.No:-36 &37 [3483] WRIT APPEAL NO: 986 of 2025 along with WA.No.997 of 2025 W.A.No.986 of 2025 ...Appellant M/s. Sri Satya Sai Constructions Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Appellant(s) Mr. K S Murthy, Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. B.Abhay Siddhanth Mootha Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): Advocate General for the official respondents. Mr. Ravula Nagarjuna for the unofficial respondents CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI : IG*'’ September, 2025 DATE PC ; 1. Learned counsel for the appellants, after stated that the appellants would work arguing for some time, out their remedies before a civil Court against the order of termination of the contract allotted to the appellants. However, with a vi forfeiture of the earnest view to prevent any adverse action either by way of money deposit, blacklisting and imposition of 2 HCJ & RC, J WAs_986 & 997_2025 penalties, it was stated by learned Senior Counsel that a representation be permitted to be filed which should be considered by a Committee to be constituted by the Government. This, it is stated, is especially in the light of the fact that the concerned Engineer who had processed the case of the appellants for termination of the contract had since been trapped by the ACB on the complaint by the appellants of receiving Rs.25,00,000/- in regard to the contracts in question. i The representation is sought to be made with a view to prove the innocence of the petitioners - appellants so that in future no adverse action, as stated hereinabove, is taken. Although the learned Advocate General urged that the right remedy for the appellants is to approach the civil Court and that constitution of a Committee may not be the appropriate step which may be warranted, yet, since learned Senior Counsel for the appellants has agreed to not challenge any further, the allotment of work in favour of third parties who have already undertaken approximately 20% of the works which were earlier allotted to the appellants, we feel that there has to be a forum for redressal of the petitioners’ 2. grievance. We are also aware of the fact, as was informed by the learned 3. Advocate General, that a Committee had gone into the issue whether the termination of the contract was justified in the facts and circumstances of the 3 HCJ & RC, J WAs_986 & 997_2025 case or not, which Committee had submitted a report adverse to the petitioners’ interest. Notwithstanding that, it cannot be ignored that the said 4. Committee had, as one of its members, the officer who has since been trapped by the ACB. Without imputing anything to the integrity and motives to the other members constituting the Committee, who were not possessing the requisite technical knowledge, we feel that the matter requires a fresh look on the representationof the petitioners. We, therefore, dispose of these Writ Appeals with liberty to the 5. appellants to work out their remedies before a civil Court. Nevertheless, in case a representation is made by the appellants before the Government, the same shall be forwarded to a Committee of at least three officers with knowledge in the field and of proven integrity who may render their opinion and a decision on the said representation, preferably within a period of three months. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, State of Andhra Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi District, Andhra Pradesh. Guntur Pradesh, f 2. The Chief Engineer (Tribal Welfare Department) Fortune Road, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District. 3. The First Floor, Murali Revenue Colony Park, Sidhartha Nagar, Labbipet, r Superintendent Engineer Visakhapatnam Town and District. T.W., Ushodaya Junction 4. The Executive Engineer, T.W., Paderu, A.S.R. District. 5. The Director, Tribal Welfare Department, Sidhartha Nagar, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District. 6. One CC to Sri B.Abhay Siddhanth Mootha, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri Ravula Nagarjuna, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to the Advocate General, High Court of Andhra [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies. Labbipet, Pradesh ssb HIGH COURT DATED:16/09/2025 I 2 0 sp aw I Currem ^leciion . COMMON JUDGMENT WA Nos. 986 & 997 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEALS WITHOUT COSTS