1 APHC010322422024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 16410/2024 Between: 1. PTR BROTHERS PROJECTS, P.THIRUPATHI REDDY S/O. JAYARAMI REDDY, AGE- 50 YEARS, D/O. 1-1226-A, NEAR VINAYAKA TEMPLE, BANGLA THOTA , NAWABPET, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROADS AND BUILDINGS(R AND B) DEPORTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGLNEERR AND B, DEPARTMENT OF ROADS AND BUILDINGS (R AND B), R AND B CIRCLE, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEERR AND B, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DIVISION , KURNOOL,KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER R AND B, NH AND CRF, VIJAYAWADA. 5. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the Part - IV Final payments of pending amounts of Rs. 1,75,26,095/- ( One Crore Seventy Five Lakhs Twenty Six Thousand, Ninety five Rupees only), even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e.I. Widening and Strengthening the road from K.M.0/0 To 36/0 of Dhone -Rayalacheruvu road in Kurnool District sanctioned vide G.O.Rt.No.379,T,(R and B)(R.II) Dept., Dated-27.11.2020 of Govt, of A.P., Under CRIF Funds 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 may be pleased that this Honble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith consider releasing the amounts payable to the petitioner herein, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKAT CHALLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.16410 OF 2024 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the Part - IV Final payments of pending amounts of Rs. 1,75,26,095/- ( One Crore Seventy Five Lakhs, Twenty Six Thousand, Ninety five Rupees only), even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e.I. Widening and Strengthening the road from K.M.0/0 To 36/0 of Dhone -Rayalacheruvu road in Kurnool District sanctioned vide G.O.Rt.No.379,T,(R and B)(R.II) Dept., Dated-27.11.2020 of Govt, of A.P., Under CRIF Funds and pass such other order or orders…” 2. Heard Sri Venkat Challa, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondents. 3. The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in not releasing the payments for the works executed by the petitioner i.e., “Widening and Strengthening the road from Kms 0/0 to 36/0 of Dhone-Rayalcheruvu road in Kurnool District sanctioned vide G.O.Rt.No.379,T, (R & B) (R.II) Dept., Dated 27.11.2020 for an amount of Rs.1,75,26,095/-. The writ petitioner relying some judgments of Appellate Court regarding maintainability of the writ petition. 4. Respondent No.3/Executive Engineer, (R & B), Division, Nandyal has placed counter-affidavit asserting that the LS-IV & final bill was scrutinized and passed the bill for Rs.1,59,83,104/-, the said bill uploaded in NIDHI portal for payment vide Bill No.2024-9042540 under the head of Account 5054-04-337- 4 12-05-530-531 and the bill status is waiting for fund clearance. It is only contention of the respondents is that after deducting the statutory amount, the petitioner is entitled for an amount of Rs1,59,83,104/-. It is further asserting that during the financial year ending i.e., 2024-24 the bill was cancelled as per Article 39 and 50 of APFC Volume-I. Due to unavailability of the funds/non- release of LOC during the year 2025-26, the bill could not be uploaded. Further asserting that as and when the budget is released, the bill will be uploaded in the NIDHI portal for payment of the petitioner. 6. Insofar as the interest component, the respondents contended that the petitioner should approach the appropriate forum, relying on the order of the Division Bench in W.A.791 of 2022 dated 26.04.2022. The Division Bench affirmed the Single Judge‟s order, directing the petitioner to seek relief regarding interest from the appropriate forum. In a catena of cases this Court had held that where dispute revolves round questions of fact, the matter ought not be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. In the present case, the respondents have not disputed the payment due to the petitioner for the work executed and the respondents have manifested in their written instructions that they will pay the amount to the petitioner and they are unable to the pay due to “Bill waiting for fund clearance”, once the work executed by the petitioner to the respondents is admitted and the payment due to the petitioner is not disputed by the respondents, there was hardly no need for this Court to refer the matter to any forum or for arbitration for passing an arbitral award assuming that any 5 condition in the agreement to that extent. Hence, this Court directs the respondents to pay the admitted amount to the petitioner. 8. In The D.F.O., South Kheri And Ors. vs Ram Sanehi Singh1, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that when a State decides not to pay the dues with mala fide, with ulterior motives or arbitrarily or when the State avoids payment of the dues with mala fide, with ulterior motives, arbitrarily or when the State discriminates, while making payment dues, such a decision of the State not to pay or such an act of the State of not paying its dues cannot be said to be wholly beyond the reach of Article 226, for asking the writ Court to do is to force the State to act in accordance with its constitutional obligation by adhering to the letter and spirit of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 9. In view of the above, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with following directions: (a) The respondents are directed to clear the due amount to the petitioner within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (b) Sum due to the petitioner would mean, the sum arrived after statutory deductions. If there is any dispute regarding statutory recoveries, the petitioner is at liberty to communicate/interface with the respondents. 1 (1971) 3 SCC 864 6 (c) With regard to interest, the petitioner is at liberty to approach appropriate forum. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 10.02.2026 SSA