APHC010611072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 31528/2025 Between: S.Suravarapu Sathiraju ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Ms. DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA Counsel for the Respondents: 1. Ld. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 2. Ld. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 3. Smt.Sirisha Rani Vallabhaneni, Ld. Standing Counsel for R.2. The Court made the following: -2- W.P. No.31528 OF 2025 Date of order:13.11.2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.31528 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents for non-payment of the bills for the works undertaken by the petitioner. 2. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning, and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent- Corporation. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent entrusted the work to the petitioner under agreement No.6/2024-25. The details of the work is, renovation of anna canteen in Gollaprolu Nagara panchayat. 4. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner duly executed the work to the satisfaction of the 2nd respondent. It is further submitted that after execution of the works, the progress of the work was recorded in the M book. Later, the petitioner submitted a final bill. The authorities of 2nd respondent, after deducting necessary charges and other expenses, approved the final bill for a sum of Rs.7,27,893/-, but so far no payment has been made to the petitioner. -3- W.P. No.31528 OF 2025 Date of order:13.11.2025 5. The learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent, on oral instructions, submits that the works undertaken by the petitioner were completed to the satisfaction of the authorities of the 2nd respondent, however, due to insufficient funds, the payment could not be made to the petitioner and that payment would be made in due course. 6. Considering the submissions that the work completed by the petitioner is not in dispute, there shall be a direction to respondents 2, 3 and 6 to verify and release the payments due payable to the petitioner within a period of four weeks. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 8. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N BV