V. Chinna Masthanaiah, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/6407/2022 · 2025-09-23
V Sujatha
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47788 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47788 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010107532022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 6407/2022 Between:
1. V. CHINNA MASTHANAIAH,, S/O MASTHANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, CHAIRMAN, KANUPUR CANAL PROJECT COMMITTEE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ( FINANCE DEPARTMENT ), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (REVENUE DEPARTMENT ), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE. 5. THE ENGINEERINCHIEF IRRIGATION WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA. 6. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, IRRIGATION CIRCLE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT,
VS,J W.P No.6407 of 2022 2
NELLORE CENTRAL DIVISION, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 8. THE CHAIRMAN, COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ( CFMS ) STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA. ...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 the Writ order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of amount of Rs.9,46,000/-, even after finalizing the bill, payable to the petitioner in relation -o the execution of work vide Agreement No. 527 DN/NC/2018- 19, dated 18.10.2018, as illegal, arbitary and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to release the payment of amount of Rs.9,46,000/-, to the petitioner in respect of execution of work vide Agreement No. 527 DN/NC/2018-19, dated 18.10.2018 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 release the payment of amount of Rs.9,46,000/- payable to the petitioner in respect of the execution of work vide Agreement No.527/DN/NC/2018-19, dated 18.10.2018, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BATHALA RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3.
GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV
VS,J W.P No.6407 of 2022 3
The Court made the following Order:
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
“…to issue the Writ order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of amount of Rs.9,46,000/-, even after finalizing the bill, payable to the petitioner in relation to the execution of work vide Agreement No.527 DN/NC/2018- 19, dated 18.10.2018, as illegal, arbitary and contrary to the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to release the payment of amount of Rs.9,46,000/-, to the petitioner in respect of execution of work vide Agreement No.527 DN/NC/2018-19, dated 18.10.2018 and to pass such other order or orders…”
2. When the writ petition came up for admission on 14.03.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following interim direction in I.A.No.1 of 2022:
“In the circumstances, the respondents are directed to pay the approved and final bill amount due to the petitioner within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
3. Today, when the writ petition came up for hearing, Ms. M Sumalatha, learned counsel, representing Mr. Bathala Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, has stated that pending writ petition, the respondent authorities have paid the amounts due to the petitioner.s
4. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
Date:24.09.2025 Ksj