APHC010515422025 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: 26630/2025 Between: 1. M/S.SRI SRI VIGNESWARA CONSTRUCTIONS,, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER V. SURESH REDDY, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. V.RAMANJANEYA REDDY, H.NO.25/27, SANJEEVANAGAR, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH RAJ CIRCLE, KURNOOL. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYATH RAJ, PR 2 SRS,J W.P.NO.26630 OF 2025 DIVISION, NANDYAL. 5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI SUB- DIVISION, ATMAKUR, NANDYAL 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 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 payments of Rs.20,72,796/- (Twenty lakhs seventy two thousand seven hundred ninety six rupees only) for the year 2023-2024, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works Providing Infrastructure facilities to incomplete indoor stadium at Atmakur village of Atmakur Mandal in Nandyal District as bad, illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and against the Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to pay the amounts of Rs.20,72,796/- (Twenty lakhs seventy two thousand seven hundred ninety six rupees only) forthwith release the payments of above bill amount along with 12percent interest and pass 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 release and pay the amount of Rs.20,72,796/- (Twenty lakhs seventy two thousand seven hundred ninety six rupees only) along with 12% interest, pending disposal of the writ petition and pas Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. THATHIREDDY ASHOK SRIVASTAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 3 SRS,J W.P.NO.26630 OF 2025 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri T.Ashok Srivastava, 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 not releasing an amount of Rs.20,72,796/- payable to the petitioner for execution of work i.e. „Providing Infrastructure facilities to incomplete indoor stadium at Atmakur Village of Atmakur Mandal in Nandyal District,” as illegal and arbitrary. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted the written instructions of the Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj – respondent No.4. 4. A perusal of the said instructions would disclose that the petitioner has executed the aforementioned work and the net 4 SRS,J W.P.NO.26630 OF 2025 amount payable to the petitioner is Rs.20,72,796/-. 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 work and the petitioner‟s entitlement for Rs.20,72,796/-. 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 instructions furnished by respondent No.4, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.20,72,796/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Seventy 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 SRS,J W.P.NO.26630 OF 2025 Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety Six only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within four (04) 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