APHC010085942024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 5591/2024 Between: Sri Lotus Construction The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 2. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 5591/2024 Sri Lotus Construction ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV [3459] THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 5591/2024 The Court made the following Order: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the undisputed amount payable to the petitioner in respect of works i.e, 1) Package No.1 Repairs to Channels under Koduru Canal system in T.P.Gudur Mandal of SPSR Nellore District (19 Sub-works) and 2) Package No.2 Repairs to Kommalapudi and Muddanamudi Branch Canal System in Venkatachalam Mandal of SPSR Nellore District 18 Sub-works as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to pay undisputed amounts i.e., 1) Rs.1,73,33,022/- and 2) Rs.1,72,66,331/- payable to the petitioner in respect of execution of afore mentioned works with an interest 12 percent p.a from the date of accepting the bills forthwith and pass.” 2. In spite of adjourning the matter several times, the respondents have not filed their counter affidavit. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has participated in the tender process and stood as a lowest bidder. The 4th respondent has entered into an agreement with the petitioner vide agreement Nos.29SE/2023-24 dated 30.09.2023 3 and 26SE/2023-24, dated 30.09.2023, for execution of work of 1) Package No.1 Repairs to Channels under Koduru Canal system in T.P.Gudur Mandal of SPSR Nellore District (19 Sub-works) and 2) Package No.2 Repairs to Kommalapudi and Muddanamudi Branch Canal System in Venkatachalam Mandal of SPSR Nellore District (18 Sub-works), during the year 2023-2024. The petitioner has completed the works. The respondent authorities has issued quality control certificate and also issued measurement books. The 3rd respondent passed final bills for an amount of Rs.1,73,33,022/- and Rs.1,72,66,331/- totaling Rs.3,45,99,353/- on 15.11.2023 and 2.12.2023 respectively. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has borrowed amounts from third parties to execute the work and is paying huge interest. The bills amount is not yet paid to the petitioner even after lapse of one year. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar circumstances, this Court in S. Srinivas Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others 1 in which this Court held as extracted hereunder: 1 2021 Lawsuit (AP)390 4 “21) 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 of works. Due to this situation, petitioner’s respect and dignity in the society will be deteriorated. 22) 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. 24) 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: “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”. 25) The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in J.Devendra Reddy V Kakatiya 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.” 6. This Court has observed that though the works were completed long back and the respondents have not released the amounts so far on the ground of insufficiency of funds. Since 5 there is no dispute with regard to the execution of works and the bills amount, the respondents should pay the bills amount on “first done first paid” basis. 7. In view of the foregoing discussion and in the light of 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 the amount of Rs.3,45,99,353/- to the petitioner within twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order with interest at 12% p.a. ii) The interest shall be computed from the date of expiry of one month from the date of submission of the bills by the petitioner till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date :04.04.2025 KKV 6 170 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO.5591 of 2023 Date : 04.04.2025 KKV