IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 6295 OF 2025 ! Between: R. V. Seshagiri Rao, S/o. Hanumantha Rao, Age 63 years, R/o. D. No. 4- 375/A, Navuluru Managalagiri, Guntur District ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department Secretariat,Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The Engineer-in-Chief (AW), Vijayawada, NTR District The Executive Engineer, Drainage Division Repalle, Bapatia District. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Drainage Sub-Division, Tenali, Guntur District. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...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 a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing payment for the bill to the petitioner for the work executed by him namely i.e. 0& M- Repairs to Box Culvert @ Km 2.500 on Combined Godavari Minor Drain under Agreement No. 1/2020-21, Dated. 24.06.2020 for an amount of Rs. 15,67,684/-as illegal, arbitrary, malafidy, high-handed. J .ind contrary to the procedure established by law apart from being voilative of Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to release the payment of above bill along with interest forthwith in the interest of justice. lA 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 the bill of the petitioner for the work executed by him namely i.e. O & M- Repairs to Box Culvert @ Km 2.500 on Combined Godavari MihOr Drain under Agreement No. 1/2020- 21, Dated. 24.06.2020 for an amount of Rs. 15,67,684/-, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. CH. SRI NAGA MEENA KUMARI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1, 3 to 5: GP FOR IRRIGATION & CAD Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010116462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 6295/2025 Between: R V Seshagiri Rao ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .CH SRI NAGA MEENA KUMARI 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 a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing payment for the bill to the petitioner for the work executed by him namely i.e. O and M - Repairs to Box Culvert @ Km 2.500 on Combined Godavari Minor Drain under Agreement No. 1/2020-21, dated 24.06.2020 for an amount of Rs. 15,67,684/- as illegal and arbitrary....” 1" / 2 Inspite of adjourning the matter, the respondents have not filed their 2. - ' counter affidavits. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has participated in the tender process and the 4'*^ respondent has entered into an agreement with the petitioner vide Agreement No.1/2020-21, dated 24.06.2020, for O&M - Repairs to Box Culvert @ Km 2.500 on Combined Godavari Minor Drain, during the year 2020-2021. The petitioner has complet^^d the work and the same was entered in M-Book and the respondent authorities transferred the bill for a 3. some of Rs.15,67,684/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has borrowed amounts from third parties to execute the work and is paying huge interest. Though the bill was passed in the year 2022, the bill amount is not yet paid to the petitioner even after lapse of three years. 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. 4. 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 bills 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 to his employees/workers and he could not make payments to the material suppliers and he has to pay interests for the debts incurred by him for execution -21) 2021 Lawsuit (AP)390 3 of works. Due to this situation, petitioner’s respect and dignity in the society will be deteriorated. »i ^ 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. 22) 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: 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 name. It may be called interest, compensation or damages”. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in J.Devendra Reddy U Kakatlya 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. ” 25) This Court has observed that though the work was completed long back 5. and the bill was passed in the year 2022, 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 bill amount, the respondents should pay the bill amount on “first done first paid” basis. 6. In view of the foregoing discussion and the law laid down by this Court in S. Srinivas case referred supra, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following directions: i) The respondents are directed to clear the bills submitted by the petitioner and release an amount of Rs. 15,67,684/- in favour of the petitioner along with 4 interest on the said amount per the entitlement vide the judgment of the of cases the date of receipt of a copy as Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.724 of 2021 and batch dated 12.10.2023, within twelve (12) weeks from of this order. ii) The interest shall be computed from the the date of submission of the bill by the petitioner till There shall be no order as to costs. date of expiry of one month from the date of payment. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// p- % SECTION OFFICER The Principal Secretary, Irrigation and CAD Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat .Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The Engineer-in-Chief (AW), Vijayawada, NTR District The Executive Engineer, Drainage Division Repalle, Bapatia District. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Drainage Sub-Division, Tenali, Guntur District. One CC to M/s. Ch. Sri Naga Meena Kumari, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Irrigation and CAD, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Two CCs to GP for Finance and Planning, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Three CD Copies. To 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. ssb r HIGH COURT DATED:01/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.6295 of 2025 I DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS