NIRMAN PROJECTS ENGINEERING AND WORKS v. THE STATE OF AP
WP/14548/2025 · 2026-01-04
Ravi Cheemalapati
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21306 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21306 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010273102025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 14548/2025 Between:
1. NIRMAN PROJECTS ENGINEERING AND WORKS, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, M. LATCHI REDDY, S/O CHINNAPU REDDY, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O.FLAT NO.406, VENNALA HOMES, UMA NAGAR,
ISSAPALEM BYPASS ROAD, SATTENAPALLI ROAD,
NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE PLANNING SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, NARASARAOPET, GUNTUR DISTRICT (NOW PALNADU). 5. THE ASSISTANT PAY AND ACCOUNTS, LINGAMGUNTIA NARASARAOPET, GUNTUR DISTRICT (NOW PALNADU). 6. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENIGNEER, PRI SUB- DIVISION,GURAZALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT (NOW PALNADU)
7. THE KONANKI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, KONANKI VILLAGE, PIDUGURALLA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT (NOW PALNADU). ...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 an appropriate Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action, things and deeds of Respondents in not paying the contract bill amount to the Petitioner i.e., Rs. 18,42,496/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety Six Only) for Construction of Internal CC Roads at be Colony in Konanki Village of Piduguralla Mandal, Guntur District (Now Palnadu), which is illegal, irregular, arbitrary, unconstitutional, against to the Principles of Natural Justice and in violation of Articles 14 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents to pay the total contract bill amount of Rs.
18,42,496/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety Six Only) along with interest for the work carried by the Petitioner 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 to direct the Respondents forthwith to pay the total contract bill amount of Rs.18,42,496/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety Six Only) along with interest in respect of work carried by the Petitioner pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MANIKANTA THOTA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
2. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats
3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Non payment of bill amount to the petitioner for construction of internal CC roads at BC Colony in Konanki Village, Piduguralla Mandal, Guntur District, is the grievance of the petitioner.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents.
3. Smt Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj on counter submitted that as against the claim made by the petitioner to a tune of Rs.18,42,496/-, the authorities have admitted to pay the amount to a tune of Rs.17,56,650/-, however, sought four months time for such payment.
4. To the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner reported no objection.
5. Taking into consideration, the submissions of both the learned counsel, as the authorities are ready to pay the net amount to the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition at admission stage.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The respondents are
directed to release the admitted/legally entitled amount to the petitioner at the earliest and at any rate, within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Date: 05th January, 2026 RKS