APHC010014662025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE 25 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1107 OF 2025 Between: 1. M/s Akaar Architects,, Proprietor RVS Shekhar, Aged about 49 years, S/o Suryanarayana, O/o. 11 Bharani Layout, Road No.78, Jubilee Hills Near Nyaya Vihar, Hyderabad- 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary Roa Buildings (RandB) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District. 3. The Joint State Architect State Architect Wing, Roads and Buildings,Vijayawada, N.T.R District. 4. The Deputy state Architect, (R and B) Department. Vijayawada, N.T.R District. 5. The EngineerinChief, (R and B), Major Districts Roads, State Buildings, M.G Road, Vijayawada. 6. District Engineering Officer, (R and B) Department, Nanadyala District. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE 25th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1107 OF 2025 Akaar Architects,, Proprietor RVS Shekhar, Aged about 49 years, S/o Suryanarayana, O/o. 11 Bharani Layout, Road No.78, Jubilee Hills Near -500033 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary Roa Buildings (RandB) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur Mandal, Guntur 3. The Joint State Architect State Architect Wing, Roads and Buildings,Vijayawada, N.T.R District. 4. The Deputy state Architect, (R and B) Department. Vijayawada, N.T.R 5. The EngineerinChief, (R and B), Major Districts Roads, State Buildings, M.G Road, Vijayawada. 6. District Engineering Officer, (R and B) Department, Nanadyala District. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Akaar Architects,, Proprietor RVS Shekhar, Aged about 49 years, S/o Suryanarayana, O/o. 11 Bharani Layout, Road No.78, Jubilee Hills Near ...Petitioner 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principle Secretary Roads and Buildings (RandB) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur Mandal, Guntur 3. The Joint State Architect State Architect Wing, Roads and 4. The Deputy state Architect, (R and B) Department. Vijayawada, N.T.R 5. The EngineerinChief, (R and B), Major Districts Roads, State HOD 6. District Engineering Officer, (R and B) Department, Nanadyala District. 2 7. The Superintending Engineer, R and B Circle, Kurnool District. 8. The Executive Engineer, (R and B) Department,Bommalasatram Nanadyala District. 9. The Director of Architect works and Projects, Vijayawada, N.T.R District. 10. Pay and Accounts Officer, Vijayawada, N.T.R District ...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 or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not releasing the 1st part Bill amount of Rs.96,47,638/- vide C.R.Agreement No. /2024 dated 04.03.2024, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the Architect's works i.e.. Comprehensive Architectural Design Services for Construction of Integrated Collectorate Complex at Noonepalli (V), Nandyal District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to release Rs.96,47,638/- including GST @ 18percent for the pending 1st part bill forthwith for the above said Architect's work executed by the petitioner 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 consider for 1st part Bill amount of Rs.96,47,638/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the Architect’s works forthwith, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: KOMMA VIJAYA RAJ KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 3 The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioner is that, the respondent authorities are not releasing bill amount even after the timely execution of the contractual works. 2. 2. Heard Sri Komma Vijaya Rajkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, G.Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings Department and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance Department. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, contended that despite the completion of the contractual work and the finalization of the bills payable to the petitioner, the respondent authorities have failed to release the amounts. Hence, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings Department, while reiterating the contents of the counter-affidavit filed by the Executive Engineer (R&B) Division, Nandyal, contended that the petitioner’s bills have been duly admitted. However, the status of the bills on the portal is shown as “Head of Account not available during the Financial Year 2024-25.” He further submitted that a letter has been addressed to the Chief Engineer (R&B) Buildings, Vijayawada, requesting him to obtain the requisite funds from the CCLA. He therefore sought six months’ time for payment of the amount due to the petitioner. 4 5. To the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner reported no objection and prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard. 6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking the submissions of learned counsel for the parties into consideration, as the respondent authorities have expressed their intention to pay the admitted amount to the petitioner, there is no purpose in keeping this Writ Petition pending. As such, 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 the admitted bill amount to the petitioner within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 7. 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 25.09.2026 MP 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.1107 of 2025 25.09.2026 MP