APHC010531372025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 27587/2025 Between: 1. METTU ALLUREDDY, S/O. VELUGONDAIAH, AGED 60 YEARS, OCC-CONTRACTOR, KONAKANAMITTA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, NH -16, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR RWS AND S, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. Page 2 of 6 SRS,J W.P.No.27587of 2025 6. THE KONAKANAMITTA GRAMAPANCHAYT, REP.BY IT SECRETARY, KONAKANAMITTA VILLAGE KONAKANAMITTA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S DIVISION, PODILI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 8. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RWS AND S SECTION, KONAKANAMITTA, PRAKASAM 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the admitted bills amount of Rs.5,15,063/- (Rs.3,25,661 plus 189402/-) in respect of execution of 2 works for 1). Providing FHTCS to Remaining houses in Putiurivaripalli Village of Konakanamitta Mandal, Prakasam District an amount of Rs.3,25,661/- and 2) Repairs of Pipelines and Tap Connections in Konakanamitta Village of Konakanamitta Mandal, Prakasam District in Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department, Konakanamitta Village, Prakasam District, which is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violative of principles of natural justice, consequently direct the respondents to release the bill amount of Rs.5,15,063/- due to the petitioner in respect of execution of works forthwith interest of 18percent and to 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents to release the bills amount of Rs.5,15,063/- (Rs.3,25,661+1890402/-) in respect of execution of 2 works for 1). Providing FHTCS to Remaining houses in Putiurivaripalli Village of Konakanamitta Mandal, Prakasam District an amount of Rs.3,25,661/- and 2) Repairs of Pipelines and Tap Connections in Konakanamitta Village of Konakanamitta Mandal, Prakasam District in Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department Konakanamitta Village, Prakasam District, immediately, pending disposal of main writ petition and pass p. 3 SRS,J W.P.No.27587of 2025 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BATTULA SANJAIAH GANDHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 3. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: Heard Sri Battula Sanjaiah Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development as well as Finance and Planning, for respondents 1 to 5, 7 and 8 and Sri M. Sudhir, learned standing counsel for respondent No.6. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the amount of Rs.5,15,063/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Fifteen Thousand and Sixty Three only) (Rs.3,25,661/- + Rs.1,89,402/-), payable to the petitioner in relation to execution of the works i.e., 1) Providing FHTCS to remaining houses in Putlurivaripalli Village of Konakanamitta Mandal, Prakasam District and 2) Repairs of Pipelines and tap connections in Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department, in Konakanamitta village of Konakanamitta Mandal, Prakasam District, as illegal and arbitrary. Page 4 of 6 SRS,J W.P.No.27587of 2025 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted instructions, dated 04.11.2025 furnished by Assistant Executive Engineer, RWS & S Section, Konakanamitta – respondent No.8, wherein it is stated as follows: “The above (2) works were administratively sanctioned and Technically sanctioned and the above works were completed in all aspects. The above work bills were already submitted to Gram Panchayat, Konakanamitta GP of Konakanamitta Mandal for making payment. The above works related to 15th Finance Grant of GP Funds. The 7th Respondent, the Executive Engineer, RWS (P) Division, Podili is not competent authority. The 6th Respondent, the Panchayat Secretary, Konakanamitta GP is competent Authority for making payment to the Petitioner. There are no Vigilance cases for recovery.” 4. Thus, as seen from the instructions submitted by the Assistant Executive Engineer, RWS & S Section, Konakanamitta – respondent No.8, there is no dispute regarding the execution of aforementioned works and the petitioner’s entitlement. Since 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 p. 5 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 SRS,J W.P.No.27587of 2025 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.” 5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release/pay an amount of Rs.5,15,063/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Fifteen Thousand and Sixty Three only), within a period of three (03) 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: 27.01.2026 IKN p. 6 SRS,J W.P.No.27587of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 27587 of 2025 Date: 27.10.2026 IKN