APHC010507462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL No: 1047 of 2025 Bench Sr.No:-3 [3483] The A.P Capital Region Development Authority ...Appellant Vs. Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Appellant : Learned Advocate General appearing for Mrs. S Pranathi Advocate for Respondents : Mr. C Sumon for R.1 CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 23rd September 2025 P C : By virtue of an interim order, dated 29.07.2025 passed in WP.No.21254 of 2024, the learned single Judge had directed the 2nd respondent in the writ petition i.e., the A.P. Capital Region Development Authority to verify and clear the bills due and payable to the petitioner within a period of six weeks. The matter was then directed to be listed on 10.09.2025. 2. On 10.09.2025, it appears that there was no representation on behalf of the CRDA and in that background the learned single Judge directed the personal appearance of the 2nd respondent in the Court on 24.09.2025. 2 HCJ & RC, J WA_1047_2025 3. Although learned Advocate General appearing for the 2nd respondent, who is the appellant in the present writ appeal, states that a pass- over was sought for by learned Assistant Government Pleader on behalf of the learned counsel who was appearing for the 2nd respondent in the writ petition, yet, there is no such mention made in the order impugned. 4. Be that as it may, the present writ appeal primarily has been filed with a view to somehow avoid the presence of the concerned officer before the learned single Judge. 5. It is stated that the claims which have been made by the petitioner with the CRDA run into more than Rupees Two Crores which are required to be verified minutely. It is stated that some of the bills raised which are to be looked into pertain to the year 2019. It was also urged that the appellant had to see whether there was any authorization at all issued in favour of the petitioner prescribing the fee which was otherwise claimed in the bills which have been since claimed from the appellant by way of counsel fee. It is, therefore, stated that the time which is required to examine the requisite bills would be at least four weeks from today. 6. The Standard Operating Procedure as has been laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment and order, dated 03.01.2024 in Civil Appeal Nos.23-24 of 2024, inter alia, prescribes that if the issues can be addressed 3 HCJ & RC, J WA_1047_2025 through affidavits and other documents, physical presence may not be necessary and should not be directed as a routine measure and in exceptional cases wherein the in-person appearance of a government official is called for by the court, the court should allow as a first option, the officer to appear before it through video conferencing. 7. With a view to cut short the controversy, since the entire issue pertains to the non-payment of counsel fee in favour of the petitioner, it goes without saying that bills have to be verified minutely. The fact that the authorities are now looking into the issue goes to show that an appropriate decision with regard to every bill shall be taken at the earliest and not later than six weeks from today. The decision, if it holds any particular bill not payable, should explain the reasons as to why the same is being rejected by way of a speaking order. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner (respondent No.1 herein) does not object to the order, dated 10.09.2025, which requires the presence of the Commissioner, CRDA to be present in the Court, being modified, more so, in the background as discussed hereinabove where the entire issue is with regard to seeking extension of time for examination of the bills in question. 9. Be that as it may, we hold that it may be not necessary for the personal appearance of the Commissioner, CRDA in the Court on 24.09.2025. We also order that the Commissioner, CRDA will take a final decision with 4 HCJ & RC, J WA_1047_2025 regard to all the bills submitted by the petitioner not later than six weeks from today. 10. The Writ Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. Registry is directed to list WP.No.21254 of 2024 before appropriate Bench, as per Roster, on 04.11.2025. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J Vjl