APHC010455882024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 23545/2024 Between: C K Yarram Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payment of the 1st and Final Bill for a net amount of Rs.23,37,324/- (CFMS No.2024-168832) even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e.,APILIP-11-Restoration of Ammagari Cheruvu and Improvementsto Supply Channel from Redia Cheruvu to Ammagari Cheruvu near Garnimitta (V) in K.V.Palli Mandal in Chittoor District”, vide Agreement No.01 DN/2022-23 2 Dt.24.04.2022, is questioned, as the same is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider payment of the amount of Rs.23,37,324/- CFMS No.2024- 168832) with interest @12 % per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of the execution of abovementioned work forthwith…” 2. In spite of adjourning the matter several times, the respondents have not filed their counter affidavit. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has participated in the tender process. The 3rd respondent has entered into an agreement with the petitioner vide agreement No.01 DN/2022-23, dated 24.04.2022, for execution of work of APILIP-II-Restoration of Ammagari Cheruvu and Improvements to Supply Channel from Redia Cheruvu near Garnimitta (V) in K.V.Palli Mandal in Chittoor District, during the year 2022-2023. The petitioner has completed the work. The 3rd respondent has issued quality control certificate and also issued measurement books and passed final bill for an amount of Rs.23,37,324/-. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has borrowed amounts from third parties to execute the work and is paying huge interest. Though the first and final bills were passed on 20.09.2023, the same are not yet processed even after lapse of one year. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the respondents have forwarded the bills vide CFMS portal vide CFMS 3 No.2023-1477325 and as the amount was not released to the petitioner’s account, the respondents have again issued fresh number vide CFMS token No.2024-168832. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar circumstances, this Court in S. Srinivas Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others1 in which this Court held as extracted hereunder: “21) In the considered opinion of this Court, withholding the amount for which the petitioner is legitimately entitled is nothing but depriving the petitioner. Due to illegal action of non-payment of the amounts promptly by clearing the bills submitted by the petitioner after execution of works, the petitioner could not feed and see the welfare of his family properly and he could not make payments to his employees/workers and he could not make payments to the material suppliers and he has to pay interests for the debts incurred by him for execution of works. Due to this situation, petitioner’s respect and dignity in the society will be deteriorated. 22) As such this Court holds that withholding the amount, for which the petitioner is legally entitled, is illegal, arbitrary, and unjust and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 24) A larger bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Orissa and others V. G.C.Roy opinied as extracted hereunder: “A person deprived of the use of money to which he is legitimately entitled has right to be compensated for the deprivation, call it by any name. It may be called interest, compensation or damages”. 25) The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in J.Devendra Reddy V Kakatiya University and another held that withholding of the amount payable to the petitioner for the contract works, constitutes patent arbitrariness on the part of the respondents.” 1 2021 Lawsuit (AP)390 4 6. This Court has observed that though the works were completed long back and the bills were passed on 20.09.2023, the respondents have not released the amounts so far on the ground of insufficiency of funds. Since there is no dispute with regard to the work and the bills amount, the respondents should pay the bills amount on “first done first paid” basis. 7. In view of the foregoing discussion, the Writ Petition is allowed, with the following directions: i) The 4th respondent is directed to clear the bills submitted by the petitioner and release the payments within four (4) weeks from today with interest at 12% p.a. ii) The interest shall be computed from the date of expiry of one month from the date of submission of the bill by the petitioner till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date :28.03.2025 JLV 5 285 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO.23545 of 2024 Date : 28.03.2025 JLV