Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50804 (AP)

Sri N.Ramachandra Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/26570/2025 · 2025-11-27

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010480702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. SRI N.RAMACHANDRA RAO, S/O APPALA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O SIVA NAGAR, TAAMBRAM VILLAGE, MEKAVRIPALEM MANDALAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANAKAPALLI. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT 5. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. Petition under Article circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring part of the respondents herein, not releasing and pay the bill amounts worth of Rs. 18,83,033/- with interest under the grant of GGMP(Gadapa Mana Prabhutwam) to the petitioner even though work was executed and completed as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 of The IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 26570/2025 SRI N.RAMACHANDRA RAO, S/O APPALA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O SIVA NAGAR, TAAMBRAM VILLAGE, MEKAVRIPALEM MANDALAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANAKAPALLI. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. ...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, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the high handed action on the part of the respondents herein, not releasing and pay the bill amounts worth with interest under the grant of GGMP(Gadapa ) to the petitioner even though work was executed and completed as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 of The IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI SRI N.RAMACHANDRA RAO, S/O APPALA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O SIVA NAGAR, TAAMBRAM VILLAGE, MEKAVRIPALEM MANDALAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANAKAPALLI. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE ECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, ANAKAPALLI, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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, Order or direction more particularly one in the high handed action on the part of the respondents herein, not releasing and pay the bill amounts worth with interest under the grant of GGMP(Gadapa Gadapaku ) to the petitioner even though work was executed and completed as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 of The 2 RC,J W.P.No.26570 of 2025 Constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents to release and pay the bill amounts worth of Rs. 18,83,033/- with interest to the petitioner forthwith, under the grant of GGMP (Gadapa Gadapaku Mana Prabhutwam) 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 pleased to direct the respondents to release and pay the bill amounts worth of 18,83,033/- with interest under the grant of GGMP (Gadapa Gadapaku Mana Prabhutwam) to the petitioner forthwith, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BOKKA SATYANARAYANA KAMLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 3 RC,J W.P.No.26570 of 2025 The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioner is that despite finalization of bills, the respondent authorities are withholding the balance payment of Rs.18,83,033/- with interest, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., for the construction of CC road from Seethamma Colony to R&B road (MPPS RP Colony) in Bowluvada GP of Bowluvada Grama Sachivalayam of Anakapalli Mandal, Anakapalli District. 2. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, Smt. D.Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, placed on record the written instructions of the Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Anakapalli, dated 25.09.2025 and submitted that, the authorities have admitted to pay the bill amount, and as against the claim made by the petitioner to a tune of Rs.18,83,033/-, after making necessary deductions, the amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.16,73,567/-, however sought four (4) months time for payment of the said amount. 3. To the said submission, Sri K.Devasri Roshan, learned counsel representing Sri Bokka Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner, reported no objection to receive the said amount. 4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking the submissions of learned counsel for the parties into consideration, as the authorities have expressed their intention to pay the entitled amount to the petitioner, there is no purpose in keeping this Writ Petition pending. As such, 4 RC,J W.P.No.26570 of 2025 this Court is inclined to dispose of the same, with the consent of both the parties, at the admission stage itself, by passing the following order: “The respondent authorities are directed to pay an amount of Rs.16,73,567/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand Five Hundred and Sixty Seven only) to the petitioner within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It would be open to the petitioner to agitate his claim for interest, if any, payable by the respondents in an appropriate forum, if so advised.” 5. Accordingly, the Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 28.11.2025 MDP