APHC010278792024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 13992/2024 Between: 1. PALETI SATISH, S/O LATE PADDAIAH, AGE- 53 YEARS, OCC- CONTRACTOR, R/O F.NO. 301, SIGNATURE TOWERS, RAITHUPETA, NANDIGAMA, NTR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT 4. THE SUPERINTENDENTING ENGINEER, PR CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, VIJAYAWADA, NTR 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing 2 the payments for the works executed by the petitioner in relation to construction of CC Roads and Drains in ST Area at Jayanthipuram Village, Jaggaiahpet Mandal, NTR District to the tune of Rs.29,64,739/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Sixty Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty Nine only) as bad, illegal. arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith release the payments due to the petitioner the tune of Rs.29,64,739/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Sixty Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty Nine only) along with interest from the date of entry in M-Books and pass 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 direct the respondents to forthwith release the payment for the works executed by the petitioner in relation to construction of CC Roads & Drains in ST Area at Jayanthipuram Village, Jaggaiahpet Mandal, NTR District to the tune of Rs.29,64,739/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Sixty Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty Nine only) and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D V SASIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: Heard D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Finance and Planning, appeared for the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.29,64,739/-, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., Construction of CC Roads and Drains in 3 ST Area of Jayanthipuram Village at Jaggaiahpeta Mandal. The Quality Control team inspected on 10.10.2023 and submitted a report on 20.10.2023. Despite the completion of the work, the amount was not released to the petitioner. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted instructions of Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Vijayawada -5th respondent dated 02.02.2026. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned work and the net amount payable to the petitioner after statutory deductions is Rs.26,16,376/-. 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 work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.26,16,376/-. 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 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 4 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.” 7. Given the instructions furnished by the 5th respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.26,16,376/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Six only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the 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: 03.02.2026 SNI 5 195 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 13992 OF 2024 Date: 03.02.2026 SNI