APHC010164322024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 8816 OF 2024 Between: 1. M/S TIRUMALA CONSTRUCTIONS, H.NO.24-10-23, FLAT NO.503, SITA MANSION APARTMENTS, DNR COLLEGE ROAD, SREERAMPURAM BHIMAVARAM-534201.WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, BYRRAJU VENKATA SUBBARAJU. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI-522503. AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DIST. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI-522503. AMARAVATHI. GUNTUR DIST. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER IRRIGATION, GODAVARI DELTA SYSTEM, DOWLAISWARAM-533125. EAST GODAVARI DIST. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION CIRCLE, DOWLAISWARAM-533125. EAST GODAVARI DIST. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION (DRAINAGE DIVISION) PRAGATI BHAVAN, OPP.GOVT.GENERAL HOSPITAL, KAKINADA- 533001. KAKINADA DISTRICT. 2 VS,J W.P.No.8816 of 2024 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DR BRA KONASEEMA DISTRICT AMALAPURAM-533201. 7. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICE, DR BRA KONASEEMA DISTRCIT, AMALAPURAM-533201. 8. ADABALA VENKATA VENUGOPAL, S/O NAGESWARARAO S/O NAGESWARARAO AGED ABOUT 40 YRS. HINDU, BUSINESS R/O THURUPUPALEM-533244. MALIKIPURAM MANDAL. DR BRA KONASEEMA 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, order or direction declaring the letter No.SE/IC/DOW/DB/ATO.2/440 M Dt.24-03-2023 ignoring the several representations made by the petitioner including Dt.23- 03- 2021, Dt.09-10-2021 and Dt.26-11-2022 and entrustment of construction of approaches on both sides of DLRB by invoking the clause 60 C and entrustment of the same to some other agency and further directing to recover the excess expenditure if any to be recovered from the deposits /FSD without closing the agreement inspite of the same was elapsed by Dt.31-12- 2020 and ignoring the several obstructions caused by the 6th respondent during course of execution of the work as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to close the agreement in respect of the work reconstruction of DLRB on Sankaraguptam Major Drain at KM 6.50 in G.C.Delta and further direct to record the work executed by the petitioner and to release the payment to a tune of about 70,00,000/- (rupees seventy lakhs) and other deposits due to the petitioner together with interest @ 24 percent p.a. and grant IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 grant interim direction directing the respondents 1, 3 to 5 to immediately close the agreement in respect of the work ie., reconstruction of DLRB on Sankaraguptam Major Drain at KM 6.50 in G.C.Delta and order release/make payments due to the petitioner for the work done and also the other deposits lying with the respondent authorities instead of invoking the clause 60 C as 3 VS,J W.P.No.8816 of 2024 contemplated under the impugned letter Dt.24-03-2023 pending disposal of the main writ petition and grant Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVASA RAO PAPPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) 4 VS,J W.P.No.8816 of 2024 The Court made the following Order: The present Writ Petition is came to filed under Article 226 of Indian Constitution of India seeking the following relief :- “…..to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the letter No.SE/IC/DOW/DB/ATO.2/440 M Dt.24-03-2023 ignoring the several representations made by the petitioner including Dt.23- 03- 2021, Dt.09-10-2021 and Dt.26-11-2022 and entrustment of construction of approaches on both sides of DLRB by invoking the clause 60 C and entrustment of the same to some other agency and further directing to recover the excess expenditure if any to be recovered from the deposits /FSD without closing the agreement inspite of the same was elapsed by Dt.31-12-2020 and ignoring the several obstructions caused by the 6th respondent during course of execution of the work as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to close the agreement in respect of the work reconstruction of DLRB on Sankaragupta Major Drain at KM 6.50 in G.C.Delta and further direct to record the work executed by the petitioner and to release the payment to a tune of about 70,00,000/- (rupees seventy lakhs) and other deposits due to the petitioner together with interest @ 24 percent p.a…..” 2. The petitioner has awarded the contract of work i.e., “Re-construction of DLRB on Sankaraguptham Major drain at KM 6.50 in G.C.Delta vide agreement.No.40/DC\2017-18 dated 15.04.2017 by the respondents. The grievance of the petitioner is that, in spite of completion of the aforesaid work, the respondent authorities have not released payment to a tune of 5 VS,J W.P.No.8816 of 2024 Rs.70,00,000/- in favor of the petitioner. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance & Planning representing the respondents. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that even though the respondents admitted that the petitioner is entitled for payment of the aforesaid sum of money, no payment is being made. The petitioner contends that such non- payment of money is clearly arbitrary and high-handed requiring the interference of this Court. 5. This Court, in various orders, including the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No.10038 of 2021 and batch had taken the view that such non-payment of dues is arbitrary and that such dues need to be cleared by the respondents at the earliest. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation has furnished a copy of the instructions of the Executive Engineer, Drainage Division, Pragathi Bhavan, Kakinada vide letter No.EE/DD/KKD/DB/ATO/F.CC/1122M dated 17.012.2025, wherein it is stated that the work for “Reconstruction of DLRB on Sankaraguptham Major Drain at Km 6.50 in G.C Delta” is being executed by the original contractor, M/s Tirumala Constructions. It is noted that about 95% of the work has been completed and the Ls 4th & part bill for Rs.66,32,668/- was prepared and presented to the Assistant Pay & Accounts Officer, Works & 6 VS,J W.P.No.8816 of 2024 Projects, Kakinada for arranging payment to the petitioner vide NIDHI token.No.2025-9197884 and waiting for fund clearance. 7. In view of the above instructions, as the amount payable to the petitioner is admitted by the respondents, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the respondents to pay the admitted amount as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 06.01.2026 KGR