APHC010344922025 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: 18600/2025 Between: 1. MUCHU GOPAIAH, S/O.SEETHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O.RAMACHANDRAPURAM VILLAGE, A.KODUR MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, 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 DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, PRI DIVISION, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. 2 SRS,J W.P.NO.18600 OF 2025 5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, PRI SUB-DIVISION, TIRUVUR, KRISHNA 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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents in withholding the payments of the bill amount even after finalizing the bills payable to the Petitioner under (1).Agreement No.250 dated 02-12-2023 (2). Agreement No.251 dated 02-12-2023, (3).Agreement No.252 dated 02- 12-2023 and (4). Agreement No.253 dated 02-12- 2023, for Rs.4,07,589/-each due to the Petitioner as arbitrary, illegal and consequently direct the Respondents to pay the bills amount of Rs.4,07,589/- each covered by (l).Agreement No.250 dated 02-12-2023, (2).Agreement No.251 dated 02- 12-2023, (3).Agreement No.252 dated 02-12-2023 and (4). Agreement No.253 dated 02-12-2023 due to the Petitioner forthwith in the interest of justice. 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 pleased to direct the Respondents to pay the bills amount of Rs.4,07,589/- each covered by (l).Agreement No.250 dated 02-12-2023, (2).Agreement No.251 dated 02- 12-2023, (3).Agreement No.252 dated 02-12-2023 and (4). Agreement No.253 dated 02-12-2023 due to the Petitioner pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B RAGHAVA REDDY 3 SRS,J W.P.NO.18600 OF 2025 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri B.Raghava Reddy, 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 the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding an amount of Rs.20,13,578/- (Rs.10,19,022/- + Rs.9,94,556/-) for the works executed by the petitioner i.e. i) Construction of CC Drain from Mirasi Fields Gorge Road to Giduturu Kyalasapatnam Road near Surisetti Prasad house at Rajupeta Village of Kotauratla Mandal, Anakapalli District and ii) Package No.14 (3 works) Construction of CC Road and Compound walls of Makavarapalem Mandal, Anakapalli District, in pursuance of agreements dated 05.12.2023 and 11.09.2023, respectively, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, 4 SRS,J W.P.NO.18600 OF 2025 submitted the written instructions of the Executive Engineer (FAC), PRI Division, Narsipatnam – 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 statutory deductions is Rs.20,38,129/-. 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 works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.20,38,129/-. 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 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 SRS,J W.P.NO.18600 OF 2025 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, though there is a small variation in the amount claimed by the petitioner and the amount determined by the official, as payable to the petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.20,38,129/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Nine only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within three (03) 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 LSP