APHC010384432024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19636/2024 Between: 1. PLR PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, C. CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY, S/O. LATE VENKATA SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR, R/O. INWINEX TOWERS, PLOT NO, 130, 3B, 3RD FLOOR, ROAD NO.2, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ-I, VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PIU, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 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 topleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payment of the 1st and Part Bill for a net amount of Rs. 1,73,26,096/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., APAM/Chittoor/Punganur 107 of Punganur Constituency (Rompicherla, Pulicherla and Punganur mandals) consist of 6 roads Est.cost 234.00 lakhs (1. Rompicherla to Talapula road via Chemchemreddigaripalle, Busireddigaripalle of Rompicherla mandal Est.cost 125.00 lakhs, 2. Ayyavandlapalle road to Balireddigaripalle of Pulicherla mandal Est.cost 6.00 lakhs, 3. Ayyavandlapalle road to Nallaguttapalle of Pulicherla mandal Est.cost 9.00 lakhs, 4. Sugar Factory road to Sugarfactory road (Bypass road) of Punganur mandal Est.cost 21.00 lakhs, 5. CKT road to Ayyavandlapalle of Pulicherla mandal Est.cost 30.00 lakhs, 6. Kotabylu road to Motumallela, Besthapalle of Rompicherla mandal Est.cost 43.00 lakhs), vide Agreement No /2022-23, Dt.22-08-2022, is questioned, as the same is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider payment of the amount of Rs. 1,73,26,096/- with interest @12 percent per annum for the delayed amount to the petitioner in respect of the execution of above- mentioned work, forthwith 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 pleased to direct the respondents to consider the payment of the 1st and Part Bill for a net amount of Rs. 1,73,26,096/- even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., “APAM/Chittoor/Punganur 107 of Punganur Constituency (Rompicherla, Pulicherla & Punganur mandals) consist of 6 roads Est.cost: 234.00 lakhs (1. Rompicherla to Talapula road via Chemchemreddigaripalle, Busireddigaripalle of Rompicherla mandal Est.cost: 125.00 lakhs, 2. Ayyavandlapalle road to Balireddigaripalle of Pulicherla mandal Est.cost: 6.00 lakhs, 3. Ayyavandlapalle road to Nallaguttapalle of Pulicherla mandal Est.cost: 9.00 lakhs, 4. Sugar Factory road to Sugarfactory road (Bypass road) of Punganur mandal Est.cost: 21.00 lakhs, 5. CKT road to Ayyavandlapalle of Pulicherla mandal Est.cost: 30.00 lakhs, 6. Kotabylu road to Motumallela, Besthapalle of Rompicherla mandal Est.cost: 43.00 lakhs)”, vide Agreement No: /2022-23, Dt.22-08-2022, forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass 3 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 :: 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, for the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of the 1st and part bill for a net amount of Rs.1,73,26,096/-, payable to the petitioner in relation to the work i.e., APAM/Chittoor/Punganur 107 of Punganur Constituency (Rompicherla, Pulicherla and Punganur Mandals) consist of 6 roads, vide Agreement No…/2022-23 dated 22.08.2022, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner and the 3rd respondent entered into an agreement vide Agreement No…/2022-23 dated 22.08.2022 to execute the work. Thereafter, the petitioner executed the work. However, the respondents failed to release the amount. 4 4. The 4th respondent filed a counter-affidavit. In para-5, it was stated as follows: “E) As per the agreement, the petitioner has completed the works and the entire proceedings were recorded in M Book by this office. The valuation of the work done by the petitioner company is at Rs.1,85,09,804/- and after deductions, the outstanding amount stood at Rs.1,73,26,096/-.” 5. Thus, as seen from the counter-affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, there is no dispute regarding the execution of work and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.1,73,26,096/-. 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 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 an amount of Rs.1,73,26,096/- (Rupees One Crore Seventy Three Lakhs Twenty Six Thousand Five and Ninety Six 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within six (06) 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: 12.03.2026 SNI 6 261 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 19636 OF 2024 Date: 12.03.2026 SNI