RODDAM RAVINDRA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/27070/2025 · 2025-12-30
Ravi Cheemalapati
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44512 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44512 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010508652025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 27070/2025 Between:
1. RODDAM RAVINDRA REDDY, S/O. RODDAM KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/O.1/50, UBICHERLA, NALLACHERUVU, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PUTTAPARTHI, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. 4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DRDA PROJECT, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER R.W.S. AND S. DIVISION, PENUKONDA SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. 2
6. THE DY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, R.W.S. AND S. SUB-DIVISION, KADIRI, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT
7. THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICERLL, PENUKONDA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the undisputed bill amount Rs. 1,41,636.33/- payable to the petitioner in respect of work i.e.. Construction of CC Drain from Harinath House to K. Hasan vali house in Ubicherla H/o of Ubicherla G.P of Nallacheruvu Mandal under GGMP vide agreement No.29/2023-24 dated 10.10.2023 even after finalizing the bills as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to pay undisputed bill amounts i.e., Rs. 1,41,636.33/- payable to the petitioner in respect of execution of afore mentioned work vide Agreements forthwith along with 18percentage interest from date of recording of bills and pass IA 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 respondents to pay undisputed bill amount Rs.1,41,636.33/- payable to the petitioner in respect of work i.e..
Construction of CC Drain from Harinath House to K. Hasan vali house in Ubicherla H/o of Ubicherla G.P of Nallacheruyu Mandal under GGMP vide agreement No.29/2023-24 dated 10.10.2023, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
3
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3. HARI BABU MAGULURI SC For SERP
4. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Non payment of bill amount to the petitioner for construction of CC drain from Harinath House to K.Hasan vali house in Ubicherla H/o Ubicherla Gram Panchayat of Nallacheruvu Mandal under GGMP vide agreement dated 10.10.2023, is the grievance of the petitioner.
2. Heard Sri.Ch.Satya Dev Naidu, learned counsel representing Smt.Bugulu Sreeteja, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents.
3. Smt Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj on written instructions dated 26.12.2025 submitted that as against the claim made by the petitioner to a tune of Rs.1,41,636/-, the authorities have admitted to pay the amount to a tune of Rs.1,41,056/-, however, sought eight weeks time for such payment.
4. To the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner reported no objection but prayed to grant reasonable time.
5. Taking into consideration, the submissions of both the learned counsel, as the authorities are ready to pay the net amount to the
4
petitioner, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition at admission stage.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The respondents are
directed to release the admitted/legally entitled amount to the petitioner at the earliest and at any rate, within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Date: 31st December, 2025 RKS