APHC010614812025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 31707/2025 Between: Svr Constructions ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Ms. DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Ld. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 2. Ld. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 3. Sri M.Krishna Rao, Ld. Standing Counsel for R.2 & R.3 The Court made the following: -2- W.P. No.31707 OF 2025 Date of order:14.11.2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.31707 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents for non-payment of the bills for the works undertaken by the petitioner. 2. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning, and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent- Municipal Corporation. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3rd respondent entrusted the work to the petitioner under the respective agreements. The details of the works are, (i) upgradation of CC and construction of drain at 16-34-63/1E to 16- 34-63/3A, 16-37-2C to 16-34-63 Samba Murthy Nagar of 13B division, agreement No.81/EEI/2023-2024, dt.04.10.2023; (ii) providing CC surface road at Mosavari street & Ragithivari street, Dummulapeta of 10th division, under agreement No.20/SE/2022- 23, dt.17.05.2022. 4. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner duly executed the work to the satisfaction of the 3rd respondent. It is -3- W.P. No.31707 OF 2025 Date of order:14.11.2025 further submitted that after execution of the works, the progress of the work was recorded in M books. Later, the petitioner submitted respective final bills to the 2nd respondent. The authorities of the 2nd respondent, after the quality check and after fulfilling statutory requirements, approved the final bills aggregating to a sum of Rs.37,50,795/-, but so far no payment has been made to the petitioner. 5. The learned standing counsel for respondents 2 and 3, on oral instructions, submits that the works undertaken by the petitioner was completed to the satisfaction of the authorities of the 2nd respondent. However, on account of lack of funds, the payment could not be made to the petitioner till now and that payment would be made shortly. 6. Considering the submissions that the work completed by the petitioner is not in dispute, there shall be a direction to respondents 2 and 4 to verify and release the payments due payable to the petitioner within a period of six weeks. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 8. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N BV