1 APHC010592342024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 31079/2024 Between: K Sai Kumar ...PETITIONER AND The State of A.P. and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: 2 ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “.... to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payments of pending amount of Rs.4,40,128/- (Four Lakhs Forty Thousand One Hundred And Twenty Eight Rupees only) even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., Venkatagiri Municipality- internal roads electricity and basic amenities for the improvement of soild waste management site in dump yard of Venkatagiri municipality, vide Agreement No.78/2022-23 dated 18.02.2023” as bad, illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and against the Article 21 of constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the amount of Rs.4,40,128/- (Four Lakhs Forty Thousand One Hundred And Twenty Eight Rupees only) with interest @ 24 percent per annum for the delayed amount till date of realization for the works executed by the petitioner …...” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1, Ms.V.Sireesha Rani, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Government Pleader for Finance and Planning for respondent No.3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of the aforesaid sum of money, no payment is being made and such non-payment of money is clearly arbitrary and high-handed and thereby requires interference by this Court. 4. At the time of hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 submitted a copy of instructions of the Commissioner/respondent No.2, wherein it is stated that the amounts payable to the petitioner are admitted 3 bills, and the said bills were also uploaded in CFMS portal for making payment to the petitioner. However, when the bill was submitted in the CFMS portal, a message was displayed with the caption “Insufficient Funds”. It was further stated that the 2nd respondent has addressed a letter to the Government requesting for release of budget to make the payments. The 2nd respondent ensured that once the funds are released, the admitted bill amount will be paid to the petitioner. 5. In view of the above instructions, since the bill amount claimed by the petitioner is an admitted bill, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to release amount of Rs.4,40,128/- (Rupees Four lakhs forty thousand one hundred and twenty eight only) to the petitioner within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 22.01.2025 KGR