Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16822 (AP)

K P GIDDAIAH v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/4987/2026 · 2026-03-22

Subba Reddy Satti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010071432026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4987/2026 Between: 1. K P GIDDAIAH, S/O. MARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. PANDAVAGAL VILLAGE, ADONI MANDAL KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522238 2. 2. THE STATE OF A P, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522238 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.518002 4. 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, RWS S DEPARTMENT, C BLOCK, VASUDHA TOWERS, SAIPURAM COLONY, GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.521225 5. 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, (RWS S), PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.51800 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RWS S, PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT, KURNOOL DIVISION, ADONI, KURNOOL p. 2 DISTRICT.518301 7. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS S CIRCLE, SUB- DIVISION, ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT.518301 8. ASST EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RWSS, ADONI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.518301. ...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 inaction on part of the respondents in paying a sum of Rs. 12,39,288/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Eight Only) towards the four works entrusted by the respondents in my favour through the Work Agreements, dated 22.02.2022 entered into by the respondent No.7 for Replacement of 30 HP HSC pump set at Nagnatanahalli Head works Clearwater pump house of O M of CPWS scheme to Aspari other 16 habitations. Replacement of 30 HP HSC pump set at Dhanapuram clear water pump house of O M of CPWS scheme to Aspari other 16 habitations. Replacement of Olds pump sets in O M of CPWS scheme to Aspari other 16 habitations. Replacement of pump sets at Chigili pump house of O M of CPWS scheme to Aspari other 16 habitationsfor the period of (3) months from the period of completion of the said work as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power, abdication of the statutory duty cost on them and contrary to the well established legal principles apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 12,39,288/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Eight Only)towards the works entrusted by the respondents in my favour through the Work Agreements, dated 22.02.2022 entered into by the respondent No.7 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 pay a sum of Rs. 12,39,288/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Eight Only) towards the works entrusted by the respondents in my favour through the p. 3 Work Agreements, dated 22.02.2022 entered into by the respondent No.7 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V R REDDY KOVVURI 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 V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and Finance and Planning for the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withhold the amount of Rs.12,39,288/-, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., i) Replacement of new pump sets at Chigili pump house in CPWS Scheme to Aspari & 16 other habitations, ii) Replacement of 30 HP HSC pump sets at Naganathanahalli head works water pump house of CPWS Scheme to Aspari & 16 other habitations, iii) Replacement of 30 HP HSC pump set at Danapuram clear water pump house of CPWS Scheme to Aspari & 16 other habitations, and iv) Replacement of old pump sets in CPWS Scheme to Aspari & 16 other habitations, 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, RWS&S Division, Adoni – 6th respondent dated 22.03.2026. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works and the net amount payable to the p. 4 petitioner after statutory deductions is Rs.12,39,288/-. 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 works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.12,39,288/-. 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”. 6. Given the instructions furnished by the Executive Engineer, RWS&S Division, Adoni – 6th respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.12,39,288/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Eight only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned works, 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: 23.03.2026 SNI p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 248 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 4987 OF 2026 Date: 23.03.2026 SNI