IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) /a, A' FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE '■'! PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM V -s- WRIT PETITION NO: 476 OF 2025 Between: 1. Korrapati Sitharavamma, W/o.VeeraBhogavasantha Rao, aged about 45years R/o. H. No. 2-40A, Annakarlapudi Village, Kondepi Mandal, Prakasam District. 2. Rayani Nageswara Rao, S/o.Venkateswarlu, aged about 50 years, R/o. Illavara Village, Kondepi Mandal, Prakasam District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Department of Finance and Planning, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 3. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation Sub- Division, Podili, Prakasam District. 5. The Assistant Executive Engineer, B.Canal Section, Ongole, Prakasam District. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not releasing the due amount of Rs. 3,27,648/- to the petitioners for the execution of works. Vide Agreement No. 80Dn/2017-18, dated 30-05-2017 and Vide Agreement No. 97Dn/2017- 2018, dated 31/05/2017 respectively as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to Law and against the Principles of Natural Justice and against the Norms of the Public Policy and to issue consequential direction directing the respondent authorities to release the amounts payable to the petitioner with an interest at 18 percent per annum. more 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 direct the respondent authorities to release an amount of Rs. 3,27,648/- to the petitioners for the execution of works. Vide Agreement No. 80Dn/2017- 18, dated 30-05-2017 and Vide Agreement No. 97Dn/2017-2018, Dt 31/05/2017respectively, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. SARANU PHANI TEJA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1, 3 to 5: GP FOR IRRI AND CAD Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following order: 1 JS,J WP.No.476 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHl JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 476/2025 APHC010603602024 [3459] Between; Korrapati Sitharavamma and Others AND ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner{S): 1.SARANU PHANI TEJA Counsel for the Respondent{S); 1.GP FORIRRI AND CAD 2.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 2 JS,J WP.No.476 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATKI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 476/2025 The Court made the following Order: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “.. .pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not releasing the due amount of Rs 3,27,648/ to the petitioners for the execution of works Vide Agreement No.80Dn/201718 dated 30.05.2017 and Vide Agreement No.97Dn/20172018 dated 31/05/2017 respectively as arbitrary illegal contrary to Law and against the Principles of Natural Justice and against the Norms of the Public Policy and to issue consequentiai direction directing the respondent authorities to release the amounts payable to the petitioner with an interest at 18 percent per annum and to pass. ’’ In spite of adjourning the matter several times, the respondents have not filed their counter affidavit. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has participated in the tender process and stood as a lowest bidder. The 3"'^ respondent has entered into an agreement with the petitioner vide agreement Nos.80Dn/2017-18, dated 30.05.2017 and 97Dn/2017-2018, dated 31.05.2017 respectively, for 3. 3 % JSJ WP.No.476 of 2025 execution of work of construction of surplus weir across Ura Cheruvu near Ankarlapudi Village of Kondepi Mandal of Prakasam District, during the year 2017-2018 and construction of check dam across Uppu Vagu near llavara village in Kondepi Mandal in Prakasam District. The petitioner has completed the works. The respondent recorded the same in measurement books and passed two final bills for Rs.1,44,351/- and 1,83,297/- totaling to Rs.3,27,648/- on 31.12.2018 and 15.12.2018 respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4. petitioner has borrowed amounts from third parties to execute the work and is paying huge interest. Though two final bills were passed on 31.12.2018 and 15.12.2018, the bills amount is not yet paid even after lapse of six years. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar circumstances, this Court in S. Srinivas Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others^ in which this Court held as extracted hereunder; 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 ‘21) 1 2021 Lawsuit (AP)390 4 JSJ WP.No.476 of 2025 petitioner after execution of works, the petitioner couid 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) yAs 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”. 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. ” 25) 6. This Court has observed that though the works were completed long back and the bills were passed, the respondents have not released the due amounts so far on the ground of insufficiency of funds. Since there is no dispute with regard to the execution of works and the bills amount, the respondents should \ i 5 JS,J WP.No.476 of 2025 done first paid” basis. Apart from to those whose works the bills amount on “first pay that, priority or preference should be given below Rs.50.00 lakhs as they are the affected persons. are the Writ Petition is of the foregoing discussion disposed of, with the following directions: In view 7. clear the bills submitted by the amount of Rs.3,27,648/- to the (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of i) The respondents are directed to petitioner and release an petitioner within four this order with interest at 12% p.a. be computed from the date of expiry of one of the bills by the petitioner till ii) The interest shall month from the date of submission the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall Sd/-SHA1K MOHD assistant registrak OFFICER stand closed. / //true copy// To, State of AP, Secretariat, . The Principal Secretary. Irrigation Department Velagapudi, Guntur District. D ■ ■ ai Secretary to Government, Department of Finance and District. 1 2. The / L 3. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Ongole, Prakasam 4. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation Sub- Division Prakasam District. 5. The Assistant Executive Engineer, B.Canal Section, Ongole, Prakasam District. 6. One CC to Sri. Saranu Phani Teja Advocate [OPUC] 7. TwoCCsto GP for Irrigation and CAD ,High Court Of Andhra [OUT] 8. TwoCCsto GP for Finance Planning. High Court Of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Three CD Copies GSC District. Podili Pradesh. HIGH COURT DATED:04/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.476 of 2025 & 01 MW 2® OgaPATCV^**^ disposing the wp WITHOUT COSTS