APHC010059272026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3909/2026 Between: 1. M/S.SRI SITARAMA ENGINEERING AND CO, D.NO. 9-1-15/2A, BESIDE CENTRAL PLAZA, NAAZ CENTRE, STATION ROAD, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER PAPPULA SEETHARAMI REDDY, S/O. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, AGED 65 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, RIO. D.NO. 9-1-1512A, BESIDE CENTRAL PLAZA, NAAZ CENTRE, STATION ROAD, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PANCHYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI,GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 522237 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI,GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 522237 3. CHERUKUPALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, CHERUKUPALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLE MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 522309 ...RESPONDENT(S): p. 2 SRS,J 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 or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the undisputed amount payable to the petitioner for supply of piped water supply parts (PWS) and PH articles for the year 2020-2021 through 1) Credit Bill No. 144 for an amount of Rs. 3,97,500/- dated 2001 2021, 2 Credit Bill No. 145 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,480/- dated 21.01.2021, 3) Credit Bill No. 146 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,890/-, dated 22.01.2021, 4) Credit Bill No. 147 for an amount of Rs. 2,85,950/-, dated 23.01.2021 and 5) Credit Bill No. 169 for an amount of Rs. 8,98,600/-, dated t 10.03.2021 to an total amount of Rs. 21,81,420/- for the supply of sanitation works materials and the same was acknowledged by the 3rd respondent with interest @ 24percentage per annum from the date of supply of the material to till the date of payment is arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal against the provisions of the contract and in violation of Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India consequentially direct the respondents 1 to 3 to pay the bills through 1) Credit Bill No. 144 for an amount of Rs. 3,97,500/-, dated 20.01.2021, 2) Credit Bill No. 145 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,480/-, dated 21.01.2021, 3) Credit Bill No. 146 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,890/-, dated 22.01.2021, 4) Credit Bill No. 147 for an amount of Rs. 2,85,950/-, dated 23.01 .2021 and 5) Credit Bill No. 169 for an amount of Rs. 8,98,600/-, dated 10.03.2021 to an total amount of Rs. 21,81,420/- by the 3rd respondent along with interest @ 24percentage per annum to the petitioner and to 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 1 to 3 to pay the bills through 1) Credit Bill No. 144 for an amount of Rs. 3,97,500/-, dated 20.01.2021, 2) Credit Bill No. 145 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,480/-, dated 21.01.2021, 3) Credit Bill No. 146 for an amount of Rs. 2,99,890/-, dated 22.01.2021, 4) Credit Bill No. 147 for an amount of Rs. 2,85,950/-, dated 23.01 .2021 and 5) Credit Bill No. 169 for an amount of Rs. 8,98,600/-, dated 10.03.2021 to an total amount of Rs. 21,81,420/- by the 3rd respondent along with interest @ 24percentage per annum to the petitioner pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass p. 3 SRS,J Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CHETAN PONNURU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. 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 Sri Chetan Ponnuru, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri S. Hruthik, learned counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned standing counsel for respondent No.3. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the total amount of Rs.21,81,420/- payable to the petitioner for supply of piped water supply parts (PWS) and PH articles for the year 2020-2021 through credit bill Nos.144, 145, 146, 147 and 169, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a firm, engaged in the business of supplying sanitation material on a wholesale and retail basis. The petitioner supplied the material to respondent No.3, and the Panchayat Secretary acknowledged the same. However, the amount was not released. p. 4 SRS,J 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 submitted the instructions, dated 14.02.2026, furnished by the Panchayat Secretary, wherein in unnumbered three, it was noted as follows: <It is humbly submitted that 3rd Respondent Cherukupalli Gram Panchayat is the competent authority to pay the bills to the petitioner. It is humbly submitted that this Gram Panchayat will pay the bills to the petitioner in a time of 6 months.= 5. The written instructions of the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.3 are made part of the record. 6. Thus, as seen from the instructions, there is no dispute regarding the supply of material by the petitioner firm and its entitlement for Rs.21,81,420/-. 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 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 Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.3, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.21,81,420/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Eighty One p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 SRS,J Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within four (04) 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: 18.03.2026 IKN p. 6 SRS,J THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3909 of 2026 Date: 18.03.2026 IKN