APHC010381072024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19511/2024 Between: 1. N. RAMESH REDDY,, S/O. SRI NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. D.NO. 46, BALAJI KRUPA, 1ST CROSS, 5TH MAIN, D. BANASWADI, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, P.R CIRCLE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.I.U., CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR 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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction p. 2 SRS,J W.P.No.19511 of 2024 declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payment of 1st and final bill amount of Rs. 53,21,633/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e. Providing BT Surface to the Road at Padmavathi HW of Mudivedu of Kurabalakota (M) in Tamballapalle assembly Constituency, Chittoor , vide Agreement No. /2021-22, dt. 14.03.2022, is questioned, as the same is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider for payment of balance amount of Rs. 53,21,633/- with interest @12percent per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of execution of above-mentioned work forthwith 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 please to direct the respondents to consider for payment of balance amount of Rs. 53,21,633/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., Providing BT Surface to the Road at Padmavathi HW of Mudivedu of Kurabalakota (M) in Tamballapalle assembly Constituency, Chittoor vide Agreement No. /2021-22, dt. 14.03.2022, forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: The above writ petition was filed to declare the inaction of the respondents in releasing the 1st and final bill amount of Rs.53,21,633/-, payable to the petitioner in relation to work i.e., providing BT surface to the road at Padmavathi HW of Mudivedu of Kurabalakota (M) in Tamballapalle vide agreement No…./2021-22, dated 14.03.2022 as illegal and arbitrary. Page 3 of 5 SRS,J W.P.No.19511 of 2024 2. Heard Sri Anand Surya, learned counsel representing Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, appearing for the respondents. 3. Today, when the matter taken up, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted the instructions of Executive Engineer, PIU Division, Chittoor- the 3rd respondent. As seen from the written instructions of the 3rd respondent dated 09.03.2026, the total value of the work done by the petitioner is Rs.59,62,376/-. The statutory recovery amounts to Rs.6,40,743/- and the balance amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.53,21,633/-. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submit that the petitioner is not entitled to interest as per Clause 43(1) of the agreement. 5. Whether the petitioner is entitled for interest or not, this Court is not going to that aspect, it being a disputed question of fact. 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 p. 4 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 SRS,J W.P.No.19511 of 2024 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 which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence.”. 6. Given the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs.53,21,633/-, payable to the petitioner in relation to the aforementioned works, within a period of five (05) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. In respect of the interest, the petitioner can approach appropriate authority. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 10.03.2026 JLV p. 5 SRS,J W.P.No.19511 of 2024 115 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19511 of 2024 Date: 10.03.2026 JLV