APHC010034582026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 2312/2026 Between: 1. BATHULA VEERANJANEYULU, S/O SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, UMAMAHESWARAPURAM VILLAGE, MUNDLAMURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522503 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522503 3. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522501 4. THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE -523001 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT - 523001 6. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PR, PRI SUB-DIVISION, ADDANKI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT -523201 7. THE NAGULAPADU GRAM PANCHAYAT, NAGULAPADU VILLAGE, ADDANKI MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT - 523201 REP., BY ITS SECRETARY 2 ...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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the Bill amount of Rs 3,69,822/- for the execution of work i.e. Construction of CC Road in Nagulapadu Village in Addanki Mandal (Reach-2) under SDF Grant vide agreement No. /2018-19 dated 20- 11-2018 is illegal, arbitrary, malafidy, unjust, irrational and contrary to the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay an amount of Rs 3,69,822/- forthwith along with interest in the interest of justice 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 pleased to direct the respondents to release the funds through a proper channel into the account of 7th respondent or any other concern for an amount of Rs 3,69,822/- for the execution of work i.e. Construction of CC Road in Nagulapadu Village in Addanki Mandal (Reach-2) under SDF Grant vide agreement No. /2018-19 dated 20-11-2018, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KAVITHA GOTTIPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 3. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following order: Heard Ms. Sai Snehitha, learned counsel representing Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, 3 learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents 1 to 6 and Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the 7th respondent. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not paying the amount payable to the petitioner, to a tune of Rs.3,69,822/- in relation to the work i.e., Construction of CC Road in Nagulapadu Village in Addanki Mandal (Reach-2) under SDF Grant vide Agreement No…/2018-19 dated 20.11.2018, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer, PRI PIU Division, Bapatla, dated 11.03.2026. 4. As seen from the instructions, the total value of the work done by the petitioner in relation to the aforementioned works is Rs.3,69,824/-. After QC recovery/withheld amount of Rs.27,717,/-, the balance amount payable to the petitioner comes to Rs.3,14,201/-. 5. In reply, Ms. Sai Snehitha, learned counsel representing Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, learned counsel for the petitioner, endorses that the amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.3,14,201/-. 6. Thus, as seen from the instructions and the submission of learned counsel on either side, there is no dispute regarding the amount of Rs.3,14,201/- payable to the petitioner. Since the amount payable is 4 admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors v. 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 submission of learned counsel on either, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs.3,14,201/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fourteen Thousand and Two Hundred and One only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within two (02) 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 Date: 12.03.2026 SNI 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 260 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 2312 of 2026 Date: 12.03.2026 SNI