G. Sridhar Gopala Krishna, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/1717/2025 · 2025-02-24
B S Bhanumathi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4200 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4200 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010029282025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Monday, the Twenty Fourth day of February, 2025 PRESENT The Honourable Ms Justice B.S.Bhanumathi WRIT PETITION NO: 1717/2025 Between: G.Sridhar Gopala Krishna, ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. VENKAT CHALASANI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD
2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following:
2 W.P.No.1717 of 2025
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
“…to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents herein in not making payment of final bill pertaining to 1)Agreement No. 47 Dn/2023-24, dated 07.07.2023, for a final bill amount of Rs.11,59,215/-, vide DR No:20/2023-24, dated 17.05.2023, 2)Agreement No.45 Dn/2023-24, dated 07.07.2023, for a final bill amount of Rs.11,30,133/-vide DR No: 21/2023-24, dated 17.05.2023, 3)Agreement No.39 Dn /2023-24, dated 07.07.2023, for a final bill amount of Rs.16,82,830/-, vide DR No:54/2023-24, dated 17.05.2023, all agreements executed between the petitioner and 6th respondent herein, basing upon the contract final bill issued in that regard, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents herein to make payment of the final bill to the petitioner in respect of the above said agreement forthwith, in accordance with Sections 15 & 16 of the MSME Act, 2006 and to pass…”
02. It is the contention of the petitioner that even though the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled to the aforesaid amounts, no payment is made. The petitioner contends that such non- payment of money is clearly arbitrary and high-handed, requiring the interference of this Court. 03. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation, while admitting about the claim of the petitioner, placed on record instructions received from the Executive Engineer, Drainage
3 W.P.No.1717 of 2025
Division, Chirala issued vide Lr.No.EE/DD/CRL/AB/A1/78M dated 22.02.2025 and submitted that bills were not uploaded in CFMS due to non-availability of sufficient budget under the relevant head of account of O&M works. 04. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner claimed for total amount of Rs.39,72,178/-, whereas in the written instructions, the total gross bill amount is shown as Rs.42,60,926/-. As such, in view of the claim made by the petitioner, the Order is limited to the amount claimed by the petitioner.
But this Order does not disentitle the petitioner for higher amount, if he is so entitled. 05. In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation, this Writ Petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to release the amount of Rs.39,72,178/- (Thirty Nine Lakh Seventy Two Thousand One Hundred Seventy Eight Rupees only) to the petitioner, within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, if the petitioner is entitled to any higher amount, the same shall also be paid as per the entitlement. There shall be no order as to costs. 06. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ ___ JUSTICE B.S. BHANUMATHI
Date: 24.02.2025 GRL
4 W.P.No.1717 of 2025
HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE B.S.BHANUMATHI
WRIT PETITION NO: 1717/2025
Date: 24.02.2025 GRL