APHC010058392025 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: 3039/2025 Between: 1. M/S PAIDALA TIRUPATHI REDDY AND BROTHERS, REP. BY ITS BY MANAGING PARTNER PAIDALA KEERTHI REDDY, WIFE OF PAIDALA TIRUPATHI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. SPECIAL CLASS CIVIL CONTRACTOR, D.NO.L/1266-A, BUNGALOW THOTA, NAWABPETA, NELLORE, AP-524002. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, , PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, , APRRP PROJECT AND ENGINEER- IN-CHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ, BANDAR ROAD, ZP COMPOUND, VIJAYAWADA. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PANCHAYAT RAJ, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): p. 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, writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents herein for not releasing the admitted amount as admitted by the 5th respondent herein to the tune of Rs. 10,21,75,966-00 (Ten crores twenty one lakh, seventy five thousand nine hundred and sixty six only) of the road works from KG Road to Kollabavapiiram via Padidempadu and Puduru in Kumool Mandal in Kumool District is not sanctioned by the respondents is arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and contrary to the public Trust and public interest and consequently direct the respondents herein to release the said amount of Rs. 10,21,75,966-00 forthwith and pass such 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 For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the above Writ Petition it is hereby pleased to direct the respondents herein to process the bill dated 08.12.2024 of gross amount of Rs. 10,21,75,966-00 (Ten crores twenty one lakh, seventy five thousand nine hundred and sixty six only) as admitted by the 5th respondent forthwith, pending disposal of the above said writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SODUM ANVESHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: The above writ petition was filed to declare the respondents' action in withholding an amount of Rs.10,21,75,966/- relating to the work executed by the petitioner, i.e., the road from KG Road to Kollabavapuram via Padidempadu & Puduru in Kurnook Mandal, Kurnool District, as illegal and arbitrary. Page 3 of 5 2. Heard Sri P. Veera Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Smt. Sodum Anvesha, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, appeared for respondents. 3. A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No.5. At para Nos.6 & 7, it was contended as follows: “6. It is respectfully submitted that, the Executive Engineer has scrutinized the M-book and passed the pass order (1) vide P.No.48 of MB No.4587-B, Dated 08.12.2024, with regard to agreement No. /2023-24 on dt: 02.02.2024 for the Gross amount of Rs. 10,21,29,641/- after statutory deductions (Recoveries) of Rs.1,03,38,697/- then the net amount payable to the petitioner is Rs. 9,17,90,944/-. 7. It is respectfully submitted that in view of the bills were uploaded in NIDHI Portal vide Bill numbers (1) 2024-9029998 migrated to CFMS Vide bill Number (1) 2025-660221 for Rs.10,21,29,641/- (Total for an amount of Rs. 10,21,29,641/-) and bills were approved by the Pay & Accounts Officer, Kurnool and present bills status are showing as “waiting for funds clearance”.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not refute the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.5, vis-à-vis the amount and, in fact, endorses the same. 5. Thus, as seen from the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.5, there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.9,17,90,944/-. 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 p. 4 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 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 averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.5, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.9,17,90,944/- payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within six (06) 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 TVN p. 5 117 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 3039 of 2025 Date: 05.03.2026 TVN