APHC010119242025 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: 6451/2025 Between: 1. M/S GARRISON CONSTRUCTIONS,, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, G. HEMANTH REDDY, S/O. G. BHASKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O.7-128/2, SRINAGAR COLONY, NEAR VIKUNTAPURAM, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PR, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.R.I. DIVISION, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, 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 or any other appropriate writ or direction p. 2 declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payment of amount of Gross Rs. 47,03,683.09/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work e . ,'Package No. APAM/Chittoor/ Palamaner/ 10, Repairs 86 relying of existing damaged 9 rural BT roads in Gangavaram, Palamaner and V.kota Mandal of Palamaner Constituency in Chittoor District', vide Agreement No.25/2022-23, dt.25.08.2022, is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of balance amount of Gross Rs.47,03,683.09/- with interest @12percent 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 Please to direct the respondents to consider for payment of balance amount of Gross Rs. 47,03,683.09/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e.,Package No;APAM/ Chittoor/ Palamaner/10, Repairs 85 relying of existing damaged 9 rural BT roads in Gangavaram, Palamaner dn, V.kota Mandal of Palamaner Constituency in Chittoor District”, vide Agreement No.25/2022-23, dt.25.08.2022, forthwith, 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 P. Anand Surya, learned counsel representing Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri P. Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents. Page 3 of 4 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.47,03,683.09 paise payable to the petitioner in relation to the work executed i.e. „Package No.:APAM/Chittoor/Palamaner/10, Repairs & relaying of existing damaged 9 rural BT roads in Gangavaram, Palamaner & V. Kota mandal of Palamaner Constituency in Chittoor District‟ in pursuance of agreement No.25/2022-23 dated 25.08.2022, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today when the matter is taken up, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted instructions of the Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Chittoor. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned work for a total value of Rs.44,59,830/- and the net amount payable to the petitioner after QC recovery/withheld amount of Rs.4,08,074/-, is Rs.40,51,756/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the same. 6. Thus, as seen from the instructions there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner‟s entitlement for Rs.40,51,756/-. 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 p. 4 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 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 Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Chittoor, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs.40,51,756/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs Fifty One Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Six only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of 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: 23.03.2026 IKN/JLSR