IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 3540 OF 2025 Between: M/s Gayatri Constructions, MIG 2-45, Near Sai Public School, A P H Colony Machilipatnam, Krishna District, Being Rep. by Its Managing Partner Smt. Kumudawathi Seetha. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District 2. The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Commissioner, CADA and Special Chief Secretary to the Government, Water Resources (CADA) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 4. The Superintendent Engineer, irrigation Circle, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 5. The Executive Engineer, Krishna Eastern Division, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 6. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation and C.A.D. Department, Cowtharam Sub-Division, Krishna 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 order, writ or direction, more particularly one nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not in the A paying the bill amount to the Petitioner i.e., Rs.2,93,072/-( Two Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand Seventy Two Rupees Only) in respect of the work executed by the Petitioner i.e., O &M - Removal of weed on BMD Channel from KM 0.000 to KM 7.420 for the year 2020-2021, which is illegal, natural justice, contrary to ' Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to pay the contract bill amount I.e., Rs.2,93.072/- (Two Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand Rupees Only) for the works executed by the Petitioner interest of justice. arbitrary, malafidy, against to the principles of law and in violation of .Article 14, 19(g) and 21 of the Seventy Two forthwith in the lA NO: 1 OF 202.*^ 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 take steps for Rs.2,93,072/- (Two Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand Seventy Two Rupees Only) in relation to the works executed by the Petitioner of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1, 3 to 6: GP FOR IRRIGATION & CAD Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER payment of bills i.e.. pending disposal V >- APHC010063412025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) • I Sfei!; [3459] 0 1 TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 3540/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER M/s Gayatri Constructions, AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR IRRI AND CAD 2.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; "...to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents In not paying the bill amount to the Petitioner i.e., Rs.2,93,072/ Two Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand Seventy Two Rupees Only) in respect of the work executed by the Petitioner i.e., O and M - Removal of weed on BMD Channel from KM 0.000 to KM 7.420 for the year 2020-2021, which is illegal, arbitrary, malafidy, against to the principles of natural justice, contrary to law and in violation of .Article 14, 19(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and conseguently direct . ■ ^ the Respondents to pay the contract bill amount i.e., Rs.2,93.072/- (Two Thousand Seventy Two Rupees Only) for the worksLakhs Ninety Three executed by the Petitioner forthwith in the interest of justice and to pass such such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” In spite of adjourning the matter, the respondents have not filed their 2. counter affidavit. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has participated in the tender process and stood as a successful bidder. The 5*'^ respondent has entered into an agreement with the petitioner vide agreement No.58/2020-21, 3. dated 30.06.2020, for execution of work of removal of weed on BMD channel from Km 0.000 to Km 7.420 for the year 2020-21. The petitioner has completed the work. The 5*'^ respondent has issued measurement books and passed final bill for an amount of Rs.2,93,072/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has 4. borrowed amounts from third parties to execute the work and is paying huge interest. Though the first and final bills were passed, the bills amount is not yet paid to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar circumstances, this Court in S. Srinivas Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others^ held as under; 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 •21) 2021 Lawsuit (AP)390 I y '■/ % b\\\s submitted by the petitioner after execution of works, the petitioner could not feed and see the welfare of his family properly and he could not make payments employees/workers and he could not make payments to the material to his 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. As 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. 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: 22) 24) "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 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. ” name. 25) This Court has observed that though the works were completed long back and the bills were passed, the respondents have not released the amounts so far on the ground of insufficiency of funds. Since there is no dispute with regard to the execution of work and the bills amount, the respondents should pay the bills amount on “first done first paid” basis. 5. In view of the foregoing discussion and in the light of the law laid down by this Court in S. Srinivas case referred supra, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following directions: 6. fP A i) The respondents are directed to clear the bills submitted by the petifloner and release an amount of Rs.2,93,072/- in favour of the petitioner within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order with interest at 12% p.a. ii) The interest shall be computed from the date of expiry of one month from the date of submission of the bill by the petitioner till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- G.HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTTON OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District 2. The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Commissioner, CADA and Special Chief Secretary to the Government, Water Resources (CADA) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 4. The Superintendent Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Vijayawada, Krishna District. The Executive Engineer, Krishna Eastern Division, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 6. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation and C.A.D. Department, Cowtharam Sub-Division, Krishna District 7. One CC to Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Irrigation and CAD, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT] 9. Two CC’s to GP for Finance and Planning, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT] 10. Three CD Copies. 5. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:22/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.3540 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS