APHC010053622025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3094/2025 Between: 1. N V G CONSTRUCTIONS, REP., BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K. VISWANATH S/O HANUME GOWDU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, D.NO.2-5, 2ND FLOOR, ROOM NO.L, THOTAKANUMA VILLAGE, VENKATAGIRI KOTA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT CHITTOOR. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...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 a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents herein, in withholding the payment for Gross Rs. 17,66,258/- in Net amount of Rs. 15,93,043/- under the amount CFMS.No.2024-173653 2 even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e. Construction of CC Road from MBT Road to Mosque in Chinnepalli Village H/o. Chalamangalam G.P in Peddapanjani Mandal vide Agreement No.580/2023-24, Dt.06.02.2024 is questioned, as the same is illegal and arbitrary apart from violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 da 300-A of The Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment for Gross amount Rs. 17,66,258/- in Net amount of Rs. 15,93,043/- under the CFMS.No.2024-173653 with an interest @24PERCENT per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work., forthwith and pass 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 payment for Gross amount Rs. 17,66,258/- in Net amount of Rs. 15,93,043/- under the CFMS.No.2024- 173653 with regard to the completion of work i.e., “Construction of CC Road from MBT Road to Mosque in Chinnepalli Village H/o. Chalamangalam G.P in Peddapanjani Mandal ” vide Agreement No.580/2023-24, Dt.06.02.2024” with an interest @24% per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Anand Surya, learned counsel representing Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Finance and Planning for the respondents. 3 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding net amount of Rs.15,93,043/- (gross amount of Rs,17,66,258/-), under the CFMS.No.2024-173653, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., Construction of CC Road from MBT Road to Mosque in Chinnepalli Village H/o. Chalamangalam Gram Panchayat, Pedapanjani Mandal, vide Agreement No.580/2023-24 dated 06.02.2024, 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 Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Chittoor – 3rd respondent dated 16.03.2026. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned work and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions is Rs.15,93,043/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.15,93,043/-. Since the amount payable is 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 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 4 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”. 6. Given the instructions furnished by the Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Chittoor – 3rd respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.15,93,043/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand and Forty Three only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, 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 Date: 17.03.2026 SNI 5 246 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3094 OF 2025 Date: 17.03.2026 SNI