APHC010054952026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3329/2026 Between: 1. K.N. RAVINDRA REDDY,, S/O K. NARAYANAREDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O D. NO. 4-46, GUDDILIPALLI VILLAGE, GOVINDAPURAM ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 515291 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P.522239 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P.522239 3. THE COLLECTOR, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 515134 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 515134 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, PENUKONDA ,SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 515134 6. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI SUB-DIVISION, MADAKASIRA SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 515134 ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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, declaring action of the respondents in not releasing bill amounts of Rs.8,56,453/-, and interest thereupon, due to the petitioner for the work executed in pursuance of Agreement dated 09-05- 2023, entered with the 5th respondent, for Construction of CC Road in ST Colony towards Temple of TD Palli Thanda of Amidalagondi GP of Madakasira Mandal as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory, unjust enrichment, violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from being contrary to the orders of this Honble Court issued from time to time and consequently direct the respondents to release the bill amount payable to the petitioner for the work executed by him under the aforesaid agreement, along with interest 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 the bill amounts of Rs.8,56,453/- payable to the petitioner pursuant to the agreement dated 09-05-2023 entered with the 5th respondent, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T B L MURTHY 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 T.B.L.Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 paying the amount payable to the petitioner, to a tune of 3 Rs.8,56,453/-, in relation to the work i.e., Construction of CC Road in ST Colony towards Temple of TD Palli Thanda of Amidalagondi GP of Madakasira Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Penukonda – 5th respondent dated 03.03.2026. 4. As seen from the instructions, the total value of the work done by the petitioner in relation to the aforementioned works is Rs.8,54,401/-. After QC recovery of Rs.7,331/- and Statutory recovery of Rs.61,145/-, the balance amount payable to the petitioner comes to Rs.7,85,925/-. 5. In reply, Sri T.B.L.Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, endorses that the amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.7,85,925/-. 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.7,85,925/- payable to the petitioner. 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 can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Non-payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 4 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.7,85,925/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Five 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: 05.03.2026 SNI 5 87 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3329 of 2026 Date: 05.03.2026 SNI