APHC010494602025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 25358/2025 Between: 1. SWARNA CONSTRUCTIONS, REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER GOTTIPATI KISHORE BABU, S/O G RAMA MOHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, D. NO. 60-16-2, SIDDHARDHA NAGAR, VIJAYAWADAURBAN, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 520010. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATI,GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, IRRIGATION CIRCLE, SRIKAKULAM. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, IRRIGATION DIVISION, SRIKAKULAM. ...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 declaring the action of the respondents in non- payment an amount of Rs. 2,26,53,490/- in total due even after finalizing the 2 VS,J W.P.25358 of 2025 bills, payable to the petitioner after the successful completion of the execution of works i.e., Modernization of Narayanapuram Anicut Project, Narayanapuram(V) of Burja(M) - Srikakulam District (Package(B) Right main Canal Works of Narayanapuram Anicut with JICA Loan Assistance, vide Agreement no 25 SE / 2018-19 dated 16.02.2019 duly approved by the respondents, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to the Petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release an amount of Rs.2,26,53,490/- towards the works executed by the petitioner along with 12 percent interest per annum and to pass such 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 to direct the respondents to pay the amount of Rs. 2,26,53,490/- in total due for the last three years even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner after the successful completion of the execution of works i.e. Modernization of Narayanapuram Anicut Project, Narayanapuram(V) of Burja(M) - Srikakulam District (Package(B) Right main Canal Works of Narayanapuram Anicut with JICA Loan Assistance, vide Agreement no 25 SE / 2018-19 dated 16.02.2019”, forthwith, pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.25358 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be 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 non-payment an amount of Rs. 2,26,53,490/- in total due even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner after the successful completion of the execution of works i.e., “Modernization of Narayanapuram Anicut Project, Narayanapuram(V) of Burja(M) - Srikakulam District (Package(B) Right main Canal Works of Narayanapuram Anicut with JICA Loan Assistance, vide Agreement no 25 SE / 2018-19 dated 16.02.2019” duly approved by the respondents, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to the Petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release an amount of Rs.2,26,53,490/- towards the works executed by the petitioner along with 12 % interest per annum….” 2. Today, when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that, pending writ petition, the respondent authorities have paid the amounts due to the petitioner. 3. 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 Dated: 17.11.2025 KGR