IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI * THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N + CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 6302, 6303 and 6306 of 2017 % 08.10.2025 CRP.No.6302 of 2017 Between: The Special Chief Secretary & 3 Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND K V Mohan Rao 2 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM CRP.No.6303 of 2017 Between: The Special Chief Secretary, Guntur Dist & Three Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND K V Mohan Rao Visakhapatnam Two Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P SREYAS REDDY 2. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM CRP.No.6306 of 2017 Between: The Managing Director & 5 Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND K V Mohan Rao ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SHREYAS REDDY 2. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM <Gist: >Head Note: ? Cases referred: 1. 2014(2) SCC 465 2. 1971 (1) SCC 670 3. 1996 (7) JT 657 This Court made the following: CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI * THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N + CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 6302, 6303 and 6306 of 2017 CRP.No.6302 of 2017 Between: The Special Chief Secretary & 3 Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND K V Mohan Rao 2 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) CRP.No.6303 of 2017 Between: The Special Chief Secretary, Guntur Dist & Three Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND K V Mohan Rao Visakhapatnam Two Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) CRP.No.6306 of 2017 Between: The Managing Director & 5 Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND K V Mohan Rao ...RESPONDENT DATE OF ORDER PRONOUNCED: 08.10.2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N 1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments? Yes/No 2. Whether the copies of order may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals? Yes/No 3. Whether Your Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order? Yes/No ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 APHC010877942017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 6302/2017 Between: 1. THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY & 3 OTHERS, PUBLIC ENTERPRISES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ABIDS, HYDERABAD (NOW AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH) 2. THE SECRETARY,, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. (NOW AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.) 3. THE COMMISSIONER,, HANDLOOM & TEXTILES, BESIDE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BUILDING, BOORGULA RAMAKRISHNA RAO BUILDING, HYDERABAD. (NOW AT APCO CHENTA SAMUDAYAM, OLD G.T. ROAD, YERRABALEM VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.) 4. A.P. STATE GOVERNMENT,, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. K V MOHAN RAO 2 OTHERS, S/O LATE GOPAL RAO, CLASS- I CONTRACTOR, R/O VIDYUTNAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S NANDYAL CO-OPERATIVE CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 SPINNING MILLS LTD., NANDYAL, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, SPINNING MILLS FEDERATION, 5TH FLOOR, B.R.K.R. BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toto allow the C.R.P. by setting aside the Order dated : 22-9-2017 passed in E.A.No.158/2017 in E.P.No.2/2004 in 0.11No.16711988 on the file of the Hon'ble Ill Additional District Judge, Kurnool in the interest of justice. IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRPMP 8126 OF 2017 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 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM The Court made the following: CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 APHC010874962017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 6303/2017 Between: 1. THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, GUNTUR DIST & THREE OTHERS, PUBLIC ENTERPRISES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ABIDS, HYDERABAD (NOW AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH) 2. THE SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. (NOW AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.) 3. THE COMMISSIONER,, HANDLOOM & TEXTILES, BESIDE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BUILDING, BOORGULA RAMAKRISHNA RAO BUILDING, HYDERABAD. (NOW AT APCO CHENTA SAMUDAYAM, OLD G.T. ROAD, YERRABALEM VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.) 4. A.P. STATE GOVERNMENT,, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. K V MOHAN RAO VISAKHAPATNAM TWO OTHERS, S/O LATE GOPAL RAO, CLASS-I CONTRACTOR, R/O VIDYUTNAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S NANDYAL CO-OPERATIVE CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 SPINNING MILLS LTD., NANDYAL, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, SPINNING MILLS FEDERATION, 5T" FLOOR, B.R.K.R. BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toto allow the C.R.P. by setting aside the Order dated : 22-9-2017 passed in E.A.No.159/2017 in E.P.No.212004 in 0.S.No.167/1988 on the file of the Hon'ble Ill Additional District Judge, Kurnool in the interest of justice. IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRPMP 8127 OF 2017 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 Suspend the Order Dated: 22-09-2017 passed in E.A.No. 159/2017 in EP.No. 2/2004 in OP.No. 167/1988 on the file of the Hon'ble III Additional District Judge, Kurnool pending disposal of the CRP , in the interest of justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. . 2. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P SREYAS REDDY 2. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM The Court made the following: CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 APHC010875062017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 6306/2017 Between: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR & 5 OTHERS, M/S NANDYAL CO- OPERATIVE SPINNING MILLS LTD., NANDYAL, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,, SPINNING MILLS FEDERATION, 5TH FLOOR, B.R.K.R. BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. 3. THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY,, PUBLIC ENTERPRISES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ABIDS, HYDERABAD (NOW AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH) - 4. THE COMMISSIONER,, HANDLOOM & TEXTILES, BESIDE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BUILDING, BOORGULA RAMAKRISHNA RAO BUILDING, HYDERABAD. (NOW AT APCO CHENTA SAMUDAYAM, OLD G.T. ROAD, YERRABALEM VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.) 5. THE SECRETARY,, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. (NOW AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.) 6. A.P. STATE GOVERNMENT,, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER(S) AND CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 1. K V MOHAN RAO, S/o Late Gopal Rao, Special Class Contractor, Vidyutnagar, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toAggrieved by the Order dated : 6-10-2017 passed in E.P.No.2 of 2004 in O.S.No.167 of 1988 by the Hon'ble Ill Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal. IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRPMP 8130 OF 2017 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 stay the operation of the Order dated: 6-10-2017 passed in EP No. 2/2004 in OS No. 167/1988 on the file of the Hon'ble III Additional District Judge, Kurnool including the settlement of Sale Proclamation dated 11-10-2017 fixing the date for auction of the EP. Schedule Properties I.e. Item No 2A and 2B (Sub-Collector's Office Building With open site situated in Nandyal, Kurnool District, and Mandal Revenue Office Building With Open site situated in Nandyal, Kurnool District) Pendign disposal of the Civil Revision Petition, In the interest of Justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 delete (i) The Managing Director, M/s, Nandyal Co- operative Spinning Mills Ltd., Nandyal, Andhra Pradesh and (ii) The Managing Director, Spinning Mills Fedration, 5th Floor, BRKR Bhavan, Hyderabad; from the array of petitioners in CRP No. 6306/2017 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2018 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 permit the implead petitioner as Respondent No.2 in CRP.No. 6306 of 2017 as well as IAs and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 Pleased to extend the interim orders passed in CRP. MP. CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 8130/2017 in CRP. 6306 of 2017 dated 16-11-2017 and as extended from time to time till the finalization of the above CRP. 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 Pleased to extend the interim order passed by this Honble court in IA 1/2021 in CRP. 8130/2017 in CRP. 6306/2017 dated 05-07- 2021 in WP. 2/2004 in OS 167 of 1998 on the file of the III Additional District judge Kurnool at Nandyal Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SHREYAS REDDY 2. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM The Court made the following: CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.6302, 6303 and 6306 of 2017 COMMON ORDER : 1. The batch of civil revision petitions are filed on behalf of the Judgment Debtors who were contesting the execution of the Arbitration Award. 2. The invocation of arbitration clause in the agreement between the petitioners and the respondent started way back in the year 1988. The respondent filed OP.No.167 of 1988 on the file of Sub Court, Nandyal for appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of the contract dated 11.02.1988. 3. The Sub Court allowed the OP on 12.03.1991 and appointed an Arbitrator. The state disputed the appointment of an Arbitrator and carried the matter in appeal right upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court confirmed the order of the Sub Court vide its order dated 15.03.1993. The learned Arbitrator passed an Award on 27.02.1999. 4. The Nandyal Cooperative Spinning Mills Limited entered into an agreement dated 11.02.1986 with the respondent for construction of ancillary buildings within the premises of Nandyal Cooperative Spinning Mills Limited. The original CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 value of the work was Rs.80,00,000/- and later it was enhanced to Rs.96,56,592/- on account of the additional works which were required to be executed. 5. The Arbitration Clause was invoked as the contractor was not paid the amounts due payable apart from release of the EMD and Security Deposit Amounts. The contractor raised various claims which were considered by the Arbitrator on merits and ultimately passed an Award on 27.02.1999. The Award attained finality and the Award was to be executed for realization of the dues of the respondent. 6. Accordingly, the respondent filed Execution Petition (EP).No.2 of 2004 seeking execution of the Award of the Arbitrator. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners submits that the Nandyal Cooperative Spinning Mills is a cooperative society and a registered Company. It is submitted that the Government of Andhra Pradesh in an attempt to revive the sick industries has introduced Andhra Pradesh Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1971. In an effort to prevent unemployment Relief undertaking was ensured to sick industries. It is submitted that the Mill was declared sick and closed down in the month of May, 1996. It is submitted that the Government advanced a loan of CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 Rs.1,75,00,000/- to settle the dues of employees under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS). 7. It is submitted that the Government issued several GOs and also attempted to privatize the industry and also issued tender notice dated 20.10.1997. As there were no bidders the proceedings were dropped. The Government thereafter issued Government Orders (GOs) under the Relief Undertakings Act. 8. It is submitted that the contract between Nandyal Cooperative Spinning Mill Limited and the respondent would have to be treated as a private arrangement by the Company with the contractor without the intervention of the state. It is submitted that the state had no role in calling for tenders or engaging and signing of contracts with the contractor. It is submitted that Judgment Debtor (J.Dr) Nos. 3 to 6 are strangers to the Award and have no role. It is submitted that they could not have been arrayed as party respondents as they were never party to the contract or the subsequent arbitration proceedings. As such, the Award could not be executed by arraying the petitioners as Judgment Debtors. It is also submitted that the state has no role in honouring the contractual obligation or liability of the Nandyal Cooperative CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 Spinning Mills Limited. Learned Government Pleader submits that the Executing Court cannot go beyond the decree and places reliance on Shiva Shankar Gurgar Vs. Dilip1, Vasu Dev Dhanjibhai Modi Vs. Rajabhai Abdul Rehaman and others2, Rameshwardas Gupta Vs. State of U.P3. 9. Sri.P.Veera Reddy, the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the Government of Andhra Pradesh set up 12 Spinning Mills in the Cooperative Sector by involving the farmers and handloom weavers. The farmers and the handloom weavers were involved in managing these mills. The State Government had invested huge funds as share capital in the said Cooperative Spinning Mills. 10. It is submitted that the stand of the state is evident from the counter filed in the writ petition No.2429 of 2002, whereby, admittedly the Government of Andhra Pradesh has 96.81% of the total share capital in the Nandyal Cooperative Spinning Mill Limited. That apart, an amount of Rs.1,79,00,000/- lakhs was also paid to the employees under the VRS Scheme. 11. It is submitted that the issue of maintaining the execution petition against the petitioners and the additional properties 1 2014(2) SCC 465 2 1971 (1) SCC 670 3 1996 (7) JT 657 CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 which were sought to be listed as additional properties for attachment and sale vide orders in EA.No.44 of 2010 is settled by the order of this Court in CRP.No.1983 of 2012. The same has attained finality. 12. It is submitted that the contractor has executed the work as entrusted and on account of the dispute with regard to the payment of dues had to invoke the arbitration clause and it is submitted that though an Award is passed there is no relief for the contractor as the state has been denying the fruits of the Award by resorting to delay tactics. 13. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the petitioners and the learned senior counsel for the respondent. Perused the material on record. 14. Resolving the disputes through arbitration was introduced as an alternative, effective, speedy and cost-effective method of disposal of disputes. The present case on hand has a checkered history. 15. The important dates of the dispute are as follows ; (i) Agreement for construction of ancillary buildings was entered on 11.02.1986. (ii) Appointment of an Arbitrator on 12.03.1991. (iii) Award was passed on 27.02.1999. (iv) EP.No.32 of 2000 filed in the month of April, 2000. CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 (v) EP.No.32 of 2000 was dismissed as not pressed in view of the Government Order issued under AP Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act, 1971. (vi) EP.No.147 of 2001 was filed afresh, EP schedule property was attached on 20.12.2001. (vii) GORt.No.116, dated 25.09.2001 declared the Spinning Mill as Relief Undertaking, resulting in stay of all proceedings for a period of 12 months. (viii) GORt.No.116, dated 25.09.2001 was challenged by the respondent by filing WP.No.2492 of 2002, it was dismissed on 18.07.2002. (ix) EP.No.147 of 2001 was dismissed for default on 17.09.2002. (x) EP.No.91 of 2002 was filed before the Principal District Court, Kurnool which was transferred to III Additional District Judge, Nandyal and re-numbered as EP.No.2 of 2004. (xi) Government issued as many as eight government orders and each GO having a validity of 12 months from 1996 to 2005. (xii) WP.No.8908 of 2004 was filed by the respondent challenging the issuance of GO beyond five years. Writ petition was allowed on 15.03.2005. (xiii) WA.No.1621 of 2005 was filed by the state and the same was dismissed on 26.09.2005. (xiv) EA.No.44 of 2010 was allowed on 09.02.2010, whereby, additional properties schedule 2A and 2B were arrayed as properties for attachment and subsequent execution of decree. (xv) The Decree Holder filed two applications for attachment and sale of EP properties and for realization of the execution amount. The applications were allowed on 06.10.2017 and 12.03.2018. (xvi) The CRP.No.6306 of 2017 was filed this Court granted interim stay of operation of the order dated 06.10.2017 for a period of three weeks. The interim stay expired on 26.02.2019. EP was proceeded further and proclamation of sale of the EP schedule properties was passed on 24.06.2021. CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 (xvii) EAs were filed for various reliefs by the state, which were dismissed. (xviii) IA.No.1 of 2021 in CRPMP.No.8130 of 2021 in CRP.No.6306 of 2017 was filed seeking extension of interim orders and this Court extended the interim orders granted. 16. The dispute between the company and contractor is 37-year- old. The respondent contractor has raised the claims which were adjudicated by the Arbitrator. The Award also attained finality, but, the fruits of the Award have not been passed onto the contractor though the Award is 26-year-old. The plight of the unfortunate contractor can be visualized by this Court for having been punished after executing a contract of construction with the spinning mill. 17. The manner in which the state has contested the execution of Award by raising frivolous, baseless and unsubstantiated grounds for denying the liability. The state cannot be separated from its instrumentality. The state cannot shrug the liability which arose on account of an execution of the contract by its officer(s). 18. It is not in dispute that the Government of Andhra Pradesh had 96.81% of shareholding in the spinning mill and had also issued several government orders controlling its affairs suspending the rights accrued to various third parties as a CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 part of revival efforts etc., The state has recognized the requirement of settling the dues of the employees and advanced Rs.179 lakhs for payment of the salaries under the VRS Scheme. In this background there is no valid reason for the state to shrug its liability to the respondent. The liability of the state to honour the Award is absolute and binding. 19. The state is also estoppled from contending that they are not necessary parties to the execution petition etc., at this belated stage. No such objection was raised by the state either in WP.No.8908 of 2004 or in WA.No.1621 of 2005. As such, this Court finds no grounds to interfere with the orders passed by the III Additional District Judge, Nandyal in EA.Nos.158 of 2017 in EP.No.2 of 2004 in OP.No.167 of 1998 and EA.No.159 of 2017 in EP.No.2 of 2004 in OP.No.167 of 1998 and EP.No.2 of 2004 in OP.No.167 of 1998. 20. Before parting, considering the manner in which the arbitrators award has been dealt by the state denying the fruits of the award to the Arbitrator, the Execution Court shall endeavour to expedite disposal of the EP.No.2 of 2004 preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 21. Accordingly, all the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed without costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:08.10.2025 KGM CRP.Nos.6302, 6303 & 6306 of 2017 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.6302, 6303 and 6306 of 2017 Date:08.10.2025 KGM