Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32759 (AP)

MARTURI APARNA LAKSHMI v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/25146/2024 · 2025-01-30

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010486092024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 25146/2024 Between: Marturi Aparna Lakshmi ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BATHALA RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following order: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO.25146 of 2024 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 not releasing the amounts of Rs.9,95,742/- vide M Book No. 90/A/19-20, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e.. Providing internal CC road in SC Colony of Kiskindapalem (V) of Kolluru (M) of Bapatla District, vide Agreement No. /2023-24, dated 28.10.2023is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay for payment of amounts of Rs.9,95,742/- vide M Book No.90/A/19-20 with interest @24 % per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work forthwith and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents represented that the petitioner has received the amount and hence, nothing survives for further adjudication in this matter. 3. In view of the said submission made by the learned counsels, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 30.01.2025 SPP 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO.25146 of 2024 Date : 30.01.2025 SPP