APHC010380242025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19489 OF 2025 Between: 1. K JAYALAKSHMI, W/O. K. ANKI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, BEING THE CHAIRMAN THE WORKS COMMITTEE, SRINAGAR, DACHEPALLI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, 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 AND PLANNING SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NARASARAOPET, PALANDU DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, NARASARAOPET, PALANDU DISTRICT. 5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MP, DACHEPALLI, PALNADU DISTRICT. 6. THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, LINGAMGUNTIA, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 2 SRS, J W.P.No.19489 of 2025 7. THE SRINAGAR GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SRINAGAR VILLAGE, DACHEPALLI MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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: Heard Sri Manikanta Thota, 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 respondent Nos.1 to 6 and Sri Hritik, learned counsel representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for the 7th respondent. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not paying the payment of Rs.2,08,843/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Forty Three only), payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., Consturction of CC Roads in BC Colony of Srinagar Village of Dachepalli Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of 3 SRS, J W.P.No.19489 of 2025 the Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Narasaraopet - 4th respondent dated 31.07.2025. 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 is Rs.2,08,843/-. The written instructions are made as part of the record. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions submitted by the Executive Engineer, PRI Division, Narasaraopet - 4th respondent, there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner’s entitlement. Since there is no dispute regarding the petitioner’s entitlement and the amount payable to the petitioner is undisputed and admitted, the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 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 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 4 SRS, J W.P.No.19489 of 2025 which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.” 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release/pay an amount of Rs.2,08,843/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Forty Three only) to the petitioner regarding the execution of the aforementioned work, within a period of two (02) 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: 28.01.2026 BSK 5 SRS, J W.P.No.19489 of 2025 295 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19489 OF 2025 Date: 28.01.2026 BSK