APHC010239342025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 12432/2025 Between: 1. M/S. KCR INFRASTRUCTURES,, MANAGING PARTNER, SRI. K. VIJAYA BHASKAR REDDY, S/O.VENKATA KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, D.NO.10-21-2/16, NEAR UDA OFFICE, CHENCHUPET, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, AND MEMBER CONVENOR, DMFT, LAKSHMIPURAM, BAPATALA DISTRICT. 5. THE SUPERITENDING ENGINEER, P.R. CIRCLE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.R. DIVISION, TENALI, GUNTUR, GUNTUR 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 any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in non- payment of the bill amounts to a tune of Rs.25,26,874/- towards the 3 works i.e., 1) Providing CC road in Peravali Village, Vemuru Mandal, 2) Providing CC road in Varahapuram Village, Vemuru Mandal and 3) Providing CC road in Peravalipalem, Vemuru Mandal completed by me as illegal, arbitrary. Violation of Principles of Natural justice. Violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300- A and consequently direct the respondents to pay the bill amounts to a tune of Rs.25,26,874/- without any further delay 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 direct the respondents to release amounts to a tune of Rs.25,26,874/-. towards the 3 works i.e., 1) Providing CC road in Peravali Village, Vemuru Mandal, 2) Providing CC road in Varahapuram Village, Vemuru Mandal and 3) Providing CC road in Peravalipalem, Vemuru Mandal, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Nandipalle Venkatesh Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding an amount of Rs.25,26,874/- relating to the works executed by the petitioner i.e. (i) Providing CC road in Varahapuram, Vemuru Mandal, (ii) Providing CC road in Pervali, Vemuru Mandal, and (iii) Providing CC road in Peravalipalem, Vemuru Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary. Page 3 of 5 2. Heard Sri Nandipalle Venkatesh, 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 1 to 3 and 5 & 6 and Ms. Anusha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, appeared for respondent No.4. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of the Executive Engineer (FAC), Panchayat Raj Division, Tenali – respondent No.6. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned works, and the net amount payable to the petitioner after deductions is Rs.25,26,874/-. 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 work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.25,26,874/-. 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 respondent No.6, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.25,26,874/- payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned works, p. 4 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 within five (05) 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: 06.02.2026 TVN p. 5 177 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 12432 of 2025 Date: 06.02.2026 TVN