APHC010010872026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 1315/2026 Between: 1. V JANAKI RAMA RAJU, S/O. APPALARAJU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. D. NO 1-123, MAIN ROAD, CHINTAPALLI AGRAHARAM, PENTAPADU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. PIN 534166. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. PIN 522238. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST., PIN 522238. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYATRAJ AND RURAL DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR. PIN 522501. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, AT BHIMAVARAM. PIN 534201. Page 2 of 4 5. THE ENGINEER IN CHIEF, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, PUNAMMATHOTA, LABBIPET, VIJAYAWADA. PIN 520010. 6. THE SUPERINTENDENTING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ, BHIMAVARAM CIRCLE, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. PIN 534201. ...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 an appropriate Writ Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the action of the respondents for not paying the Final Net Bill to a tune of Amount of Rs.7,62,446/- pertaining to two (2) G.G.M.P Works ie., (i) Construction of CC Road from Vadapalli Prasadacharyulu (H) to Vemulamanda Krishnamraju (H) in Chintapalli (V) of Pentapadu (M) vide Work I.D No. PR-4969-32024 to tune of Rs.4,01,353/- and (ii) Construction of CC Drain from Vadapalli Prasadacharyulu (H) to Vemulamanda Krishnamraju (H) in Chintapalli (V) of Pentapadu (M) vide Work I.D No. PR-4969-33641 to tune of Rs.3,61,093/- as illegal, and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct respondents to pay Final Net Bill to a tune of Amount of Rs. 7,62,446/- with 24 percent interest from the date of completion of contract to till the date of payment and to and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 release Final Net Bill to a tune of Amount of Rs. 7,62,446/-, pending disposal of main Writ Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A.SREE RAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): p. 3 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ORDER Heard Sri A.Sree Ram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the Final Net Bill amount to a tune of Rs.7,62,446/- pertaining to two (2) G.G.M.P Works i.e., (i) Construction of CC Road from Vadapalli Prasadacharyulu (H) to Vemulamanda Krishnamraju (H) in Chintapalli (V) of Pentapadu (M) vide Work I.D No.PR-4969-32024 to tune of Rs.4,01,353/- and (ii) Construction of CC Drain from Vadapalli Prasadacharyulu (H) to Vemulamanda Krishnamraju (H) in Chintapalli (V) of Pentapadu (M) vide Work I.D No.PR-4969-33641 to tune of Rs.3,61,093/-, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of the 7th respondent. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions is Rs.7,56,328/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also endorses the same. p. 4 6. Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.7,56,328/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors Vs. Chief General Manager & Ors1, it was held at Para No.8 as under: “Be that as it may, the High court has not dealt with the merits of the writ petition. Moreover, it is not an inviolable rule that no money claim can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Non- payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the part of respondents and for claiming the same, a writ petition may lie.Further, throwing a writ petition on ground of availability of alternative remedy after 10 years, particularly, when parties have exchanged their affidavits, is not the correct course unless there are disputed questions of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.”. 7. Given the instructions furnished by the 7th respondent, the Writ Petition is Disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.7,56,328/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned works, within three (03) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400