1 APHC010031132026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 2025/2026 Between: 1. SRI G KOTAMA RAJU, S/O ANKAMAIAH GOKARLA AGED ABOUT 57YEARS,OCCUPATION CONTRACTOR, R/O, CHANDRALAPADU, MANDALM, VELADHIKOTHAPALEM,VELADI,KRISHNA. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNIGIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, NANDIGAMA NAGAR PANCHAYAT / MUNICIPALITY, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NANDIGAMA NAGAR PANCHAYAT / MUNICIPALITY KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT. (IMPLEADED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 30.03.2026 IN I.A.NO.2 OF 2026) ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TAGORE YADAV YARAGORLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2 1. SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI,STANDING COUNSEL FOR MUNICIPALITIES 2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri Manthan Sarma, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Tagore Yadav Yaragorla, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri M. Srinu Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development and Smt. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 & 3. 2. Smt. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 & 3, has submitted the Affidavitof the Commissioner of Nandigama Nagar Panchayat, Krishna District dated 28.03.2026. Copy of it is supplied to the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and the same is taken on record. 3. In para 2 of the Affidavit, the Respondents have admitted the execution of the work by the Writ Petitioner and it has been indicated that the Writ Petitioner is entitled for a net amount of Rs.12,53,249/-. It also indicates that the test check by the Executive Engineer, Public Health, Vijayawada is also complete. It is stated in the penultimate paragraph that the amounts could not be paid due to insufficient Municipal General Funds. Having noted the same, this Court is of the view that the Respondent Corporation cannot withhold the amounts that are due to the Writ Petitioner on the ground of insufficient amount.(Please see (1) Surya Constructions vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others : (2019) 16 SCC 794 - Para Nos.2, 3 & 4, (2) Mr. S.C. Meena, EE (Project Narela) vs. Amit Tanwar : 2018 SCC OnLine Del 8035 - Para No.48, (3) Kashmir Wood Products vs Verinag Development Authority and Others : 2021 SCC OnLine J&K 814 - Para No.8, (4) Kattam Reddy Venkateswarlu Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipalities and Urban Development Department and three 3 others : Order dated 23.01.2026 in W.P.No.34418 of 2025 of High Court of Andhra Pradesh) 4. In the above premise, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this Writ Petition, with a direction to the Respondent Authorities, particularly Respondent No.2 and the newly impleaded Respondent No.4, to complete the entire administrative process, bothinter-departmental and intra-departmental, by way of mutual cooperation and coordination, within a period ofeight (8) weeks from today and transfer the due amount to the bank account of the Writ Petitioner within four (4) weeks thereafter. 5. Writ Petitioner is directed to submit the bank account details to the Competent Authority within four (4) weeks from today for effective compliance. 6. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No order as to costs. 7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt:30.03.2026 Vns